THE STRUCTURE OF CASE v2
Your preclear has a case.
Case consists of desire and view in opposition.
Desire is the creative thrust of his basic purposes.
Natively a being creates in the mere conception of things.
View is the constellation of postulates the being has made about
the AllThatIs, that limit and direct his desire.
Unlimitedness is native.
All postulates are postulates of limitation.
All creation is creation of limitation.
Desire then becomes his pursuit of basic purposes through time
towards a final havingness, in other words a game.
A game is 1.) a matrix of freedoms which are native, 2.) intrinsic
purposes which are also native, 3.) barriers which are postulated, and
4.) instrumental purposes which are also postulated.
Intrinsic purposes are those things which are fundamentally
valuable for their own sake without further say so. For example peace
and pleasure.
Instrumental purposes are those things which are valuable only
because they lead to intrinsic valuables through the matrix of
conditions set up by the game.
We chase the intrinsic via the instrumental.
Intrinsic purposes are things like attaining pleasure and avoiding
pain.
Instrumental purposes are getting a good education or job which
provides survival, because non survival leads to pain.
The primary barrier is time which places time between desire and
havingness, but provides chase between the two, which has a desirability
of its own.
When view is balanced, it provides an optimum playing field, and
game to play. The being is happy playing, winning and losing, and lives
at Spirit of Play.
When view is not balanced, either towards to many wins, or to many
losses, the being is no longer happy, as playing becomes overwhelmed by
winning or losing.
Both winning and losing mean END OF PLAY, end of game, end of time.
People cry when they win because they have lost the game.
Happiness is PLAY.
Sorrow is loss of game through winning or losing.
Who is harder to audit, the guy who won the Olympics or the guy who
lost the Olympics?
They may be two different kinds of sorrow, but sorrow they be.
Play is entries in one's appointment book far into the future.
Sorrow is an empty appointment book.
Happiness is looking into one's appointment book with promise of
future pleasure.
Sorrow is looking into an empty appointment book with downcast
eyes.
Happiness is a plethora of operating connections with others.
Sorrow is no more connections forever for free.
A connection is an operating flow of affinity, agreement,
communication and understandings between beings or things.
A connection exists where ever there is
Harmony, Accord, and co-communication. (Adore)
Affinity, Reality, Communication and Understanding (Scientology)
Affection, Comprehension, Communication, and Communion (Meta
Psychology)
SHOCK
A shock is a moment in time when one runs into an unexpected
counter postulate that stops one from forward motion towards one's
goals, leaving one bewildered, incredulous, indecisive and unable to
decide which way to go or what to do next.
Irresolution.
The stop produces a return to native state, a moment of
timelessness.
When one's chase is serious, shock is painful.
View becomes polluted, unbalanced, through shock.
View is setup through native desire to be susceptible to loss,
resulting in unrecoverable surprise and thus shock.
When a being experiences a moment of shock, a moment of stop, from
which he cannot recover his sense of responsibility, he will change
directions and go somewhere else than where he was originally going.
Both his desire and his view become clouded with further
limitations and impossibilities that lower the optimum level of play.
His Spirit of Play becomes less.
Eventually he becomes serious, and then criminal, he gets others to
play for him, and then counter productive, he plays to lose, to get rid
of the game before he loses it anyhow, and then apathetic as he goes
through the motions of play because he has to.
People are in shock about being alive.
"What?!!! I am alive?!!! Who the F*** ordered that?!!!"
People are in shock about being a body.
"What?!!! I am a body?!!! How the hell did that happen?!!!"
If a shock won't run, it is probably under the duress of a bigger
shock. Find the bigger earlier/later shock and it will run.
Remember the preclear has shocks at the Eternal, Immortal and
Mortal levels.
Thus he has shocks in the future too.
Immortal means forever within a single time stream.
Eternal means forever outside of time.
If a mortal shock won't run, scout the immortal area. If the
immortal area won't run, scout the eternal area.
The first shock will run like wildfire. Watch it.
CASE
Thus auditable case consists of moments of
Balanced desire and view -> shock -> polluted desire and view.
The result of pollution of desire and view is Q&A, meaning changing
course to something else.
Q&A means Question and Answer and refers usually to an improper
mode of auditing wherein the auditor changes the question every time he
gets a new answer from the preclear, rather than continuing with the
same question until he gets all answers to it.
In our case here, Q&A means changing the question because one
failed to get the answer one needed. Thus one gives up, and changes
course.
The question would be "How do I get what I desire?", followed by an
"I can't", followed by "Well I don't actually desire that, I desire
this, so we will chase this instead."
Some people's whole lives are a circus of astounding acrobatics of
Q&A, because every time they get stopped no matter how weakly, they
change direction rather than handle the stop and get on with the
original purpose.
These people make you feel like you are in kind of a whirlpool.
That's them going around in circles never getting anywhere but smaller
and smaller.
The pollution of desire is the alloying of original desire with
other lesser desires in order to keep going at any cost, even if in the
opposite direction one started in.
Pollution of view consists of further postulates of limitation,
barriers, debasements and the futile vanity (failed attempt in vain) of
taking responsibility for the stop, that then make it impossible to
recover from the shock.
These are called God Postulates, because the being creates them
during the moment of shock from a native, if painful, point of view,
thus they have absolute power over his future.
He thinks they are true because he observes they are true, when in
fact they are true only because he considers they are true.
Running into a God Postulate is like running into a spiritual wall
of failure. You bounce off it, so there you have your proof that its
true, clear observation of failure.
The being has a choice at that moment, to believe his observation,
or be with the wall until it turns back into a consideration, at which
point he can drop the conception, and the barrier of limitation will
vanish in the mere deconception of it.
As the being sits with the wall, feeling his bruises, the charge of
the shock flows out like a huge flow of energy, IF the being lets it.
As the energy flows away, the wall changes from a forgone
conclusion of limitation, back into a consideration, and returns under
the control of the being's sovereign desire.
Once the being considers that the wall is an observation and not a
consideration, the charge that he builds up on the loss prevents him
from being with the wall enough to unconsider it.
As the charge runs out, the being recreates HIS connection to the
wall. It becomes HIS wall again, he starts to own the wall again,
rather than the wall owning him, and when his reconnection is complete,
he can drop it or leave it in place, but now its his wall operating
under his sovereign command.
At this time he has restored his God Postulate to its proper place
AS a God Postulate, and the joke is he won't be able to keep it around
unless he goes into shock about it and falls away from it again.
All pollution of desire and view is through this mechanism of the
God Postulate. Polluted view is merely original view alloyed with
negative God Postulates pretending to be observations of "its just the
way things are".
Thus all pollution of desire and view is auditable.
Even if one has to run 'unauditability' once in a while :)
Auditing is the process of locating these moments of shock, and
recovering the before and after desire and view, and any possible pre
setups that existed from native state, and through the erasure of the
polluted views, restore a strong unalloyed desire and ability set
producing forward motion again in Spirit of Play that is as strong or
stronger than the original before shock moment.
If the original desire can not be recovered fully for practical
reasons, a bigger better one can always be put in place.
He may never be able to have what he once wanted, but it will fall
away as insignificant compared to what he WANTS NOW!
You see?
Thus people who failed miserably and recover, go higher than those
that always had a good time playing.
Small games may come a cropper, but when recovered, bigger games
arise.
So don't ever let your preclear tell you 'Its too late to get
better'.
Happiness in the end is not the ability to win every previous game
the preclear once attempted, time has moved on, there are new games and
new playing fields aborning every day all of which are BIGGER AND BETTER
than the old bitter ones.
You don't have to WIN THE PAST to attain operating happiness and
spirit of play in the present, you have to be able to win the present
and the future.
Native state doesn't have to win any game at all to be happy. It
has to be ABLE to win any game, which it can if it sets it up that way.
But if it set it up that losses were to happen, then it becomes a win
that you are able to create a loss.
But that was then, this is now, its not time for the games of then
any more, so get on with the games of now, eh? You do not HAVE to set
yourself up for more endless losses, if you operate from native state
with some rationality rather than from shock.
THE STRUCTURE OF CASE
Case persists because of the effort to as-is shock by not-ising it.
It is as simple as that.
The effort to make nothing out of something or the effort to make
something out of nothing by covering it in black.
You can vanish any created thing you wish, but not by covering it
in heavy effort, black, invisibility and pretending it isn't there,
because it always will be there just a bit, to bite you later through
the steel and concrete clouds of obscurity, obfuscation and oblivion.
The least absolute there is, is oblivion, there will always be
something inscrutable shining through. The 'WHAT IT IS' will forever
elude you, even while it bites you in the ass or your face over and over
again.
That's the upside of oblivion.
Notice the way to audit NOT-ISNESS is to run not-isness, not to run
as-isness. If you have covered something in black, you do NOT look
inside the black to see what it is. You replicate the covering in black
by covering it more in black until the black vanishes naturally when you
let go of making more of it.
Spot NO not-isness
Spot SOME not-isness
To spot means to get the idea of.
Duplication of the not-ising process will result in a visible
is-ness. Then get the alter-isness off the is-ness through the same
procedure of altering it more, and you will be left with an as-isness.
Spot NO alter-isness.
Spot SOME alter-isness.
The as-isness will vanish on its own the next time a pretty girl
walks by.
Spot NO pretty girl.
Spot SOME pretty girl.
Yes even girls need to spot pretty girls too.
A pretty anything will do.
THE 3 LEVELS OF SHOCK.
The 3 levels of shock are:
1.) The Lock level, consisting of reminders of loss.
2.) The Secondary level, consisting of actual moments of loss, loss
of games, unique preciousness and survival assets, through permanent
death, departure or reversal.
Secondaries are moments of anger, fear, despair, sorrow, pity and
apathy. Secondaries can happen long BEFORE the loss happens, during
first awareness that the loss WILL happen.
3.) The Engram level, consisting of moments of physical injury and
unconsciousness to the body or the spirit.
These 3 levels tend to correspond to thought, emotion and heavy
effort.
Emotion buries the thought, and effort buries the emotion.
Thus sorrow will bury what he lost, and engrams will bury the
sorrow.
Thus a heavily charged case will seem like 'nothing there'.
But most will have some awareness that they lost something or did
wrong in their 'long ago'.
Below these three case levels is a level of pure shock, independent
of any particular event that has ever gone on.
By running the pure shock level, the entire case is run out at core
and falls away without need for inspection of particulars.
However running the pure shock level is almost impossible without
running a lot of the other 3 levels in round robin order.
There are a couple of things to know about running case.
One needs to run the secondary level, before the engram level will
open up, and then one needs to run the engram level before more
secondary level will open up.
Thus after running much effort (engram ridges), one suddenly finds
oneself crying about everything and anything. Then it dries up until
the next layer of force, effort, pain and unconsciousness is run out.
Running locks can be useful, but running pleasure moments will work
better. By touching the good points in life, one is dropped into the
sorrows and losses much faster.
If there ARE any good moments in life for your preclear.
Good moments in life consist mostly of moments of strong connection
between beings, moments of clear and unrestrained relating.
To relate means to communicate about what is important to one.
Relationships consist of relating.
Where relating is blocked due to upsets and withholds, just so is
the relationship blocked.
When a relationship is more blocked than not, it tends to end.
When the relationship gets seriously upset, each party will debond
and disown each other as peers in the static.
Then you get wars of death and damnation.
Relating depends on connection, comm lines built of affinity,
reality, communication and understandings over which one can operate,
transmit and receive relatingnesses.
Connection takes place on the physical, emotion, mental and
spiritual levels and results in good operation and being fully
comfortable and trusting around another being.
Trust and respect is critical because intimacy is in part the
relating of vulnerabilities.
Vulnerability leads into the 'take care of' chain.
The vast proportion of life is the desire and goal to take care of
and take responsibility over the survival of others, and to have them do
the same for you.
Watch out, the desire to take care of something FOREVER, is a
violation of the sovereign while in which everything exists.
You can take care of anything for a while, but never forever.
Same thing for yourself.
Upsets are often the result of contempt and betrayal of respect and
trust.
ReSpect means to see again, namely willingness and desire to see
again.
Much loss is built around the "I will never see you again" chain.
Or worse the, "I don't ever WANT to see you again" chain.
So of course he is a black V, and can't see anything, if he did see
something it would be his ocean of everyone and everything he would
never see again.
A body can only cry so fast, a few gallons a minute.
CLEAR CONNECTIONS
One can relate or express anything, feel anything, and communicate
anything on a clear connection, and it is these connections that make
life worthwhile.
When all connections are broken or severed there is no reason to go
left or right, forward or backward, as the only reason to GO ANYWHERE is
to find and operate a working connection, a working productive
relatingness (relationship).
When all connections are gone, people cry themselves to sleep,
become catatonic or kill themselves.
SORROW
Sorrow is not about the past, sorrow is about the future.
Charge builds when sorrow is not cried and expressed.
Dry eyed sorrow, UNEXPRESSED sorrow, never heals.
Thus one wants to find those moments in the past when sorrow was
not expressed, but it won't be at the moment of loss, but at the moment
of first awareness that the loss could or would happen.
SORROW IS ABOUT THE FUTURE.
First awareness of IMPENDING death, departure or reversal of
affinity is critical.
All of the sorrow that needs to be found is about the future, about
things that haven't happened yet, even if that moment of first awareness
of future loss is now in the past.
A preclear's first awareness that his mother WOULD die someday,
even if would be 80 years in the future, is a much heavier incident than
his sorrow on the day she actually did die.
Now that the preclear is 30, his first awareness in the past at 5
years old that his mother WILL die in another 10 or 20 years is where
the charge lies, even if mother is still alive now!
The preclear is building up charge all during the time she is still
alive.
If a person can not find sorrow in his past, he needs to find it in
his future.
Spot a present time pet, and imagine how it will be on the last day
with that pet.
Get the words, the feelings, the love, the sorrow.
No sorrow means no love, no love means no sorrow.
Suppress sorrow and one suppresses the love with it, because sorrow
is merely love in inversion.
NEVER EVER lose a chance to cry when it comes, and not feel it out
completely until its gone for the moment.
Like fine wine, sorrow must be savored to the last drop.
It will come back, as love always comes back if you let it.
How much can you love?
How much can you cry?
How big are the oceans?
Every time you suppress sorrow about the future, you suppress love
and you get worse. You block a connection before it gets broken.
Every time you feel sorrow and release it completely, you get
better. The connection goes co eternal.
Eventually you will find the laughter of Eternal life and love at
the bottom of that ocean of tears.
The world of Sabe is the world of immortal sorrow.
The world if Dura is the world if eternal laughter.
People feel small.
They feel their sorrow is bigger than they are.
And if their sorrow is bigger than they are, then so is their love,
and so the person feels (wrongly that) both must be corralled
(controlled) lest the two together DO something uncontrolled.
People are afraid of their sorrow, it wrinkles up their faces,
humiliates them, makes them wail, feel vulnerable and out of control.
It's this last thing that worries people and makes others ridicule
those who don't stay in control.
But mainly people are terrified of how oceanic sorrow can be, they
get into it a bit too deep, and they just KNOW they are being carried
away by an overwhelming undertow in a bottomless ocean that dwarfs them.
Surrender for a while is the only answer.
Once they let go and let the power take them where it will, they
finally see that their sorrow is their own enormous love.
That's when the laughter starts and they see the ludicrousness of
their own demise.
Then they get the idea that they aren't small at all, they just
care too much. And thus they recover some of their size, enormity
actually.
That laughter at the bottom of the well of sorrow, is God's promise
and gift to those who are honest with themselves, and with others, about
their love, and cry it out fully, holding nothing back, as holding back
sorrow is holding back love, which makes you smaller, less than oceanic.
And when the sorrow breaks into laughter, laugh it out fully.
Even at the funeral.
Those who aren't laughing, aren't loving.
No tears, no life.
And less life afterwards.
Excess of joy weeps, excess of sorrow laughs.
And since we all are God in carnation, that's a lot of love, a lot
of laughter and a lot of tears.
Vulnerability is that cross over point at the bottom of the well of
tears, between sorrow and love, and wondering if the light will ever
come.
How deep do you dare to go into sorrow, to find the light of
Eternal love?
Sanity is keeping those connection lines open even if nothing flows
on them any more. You don't turn the radio off just because your friend
at the other end doesn't answer you.
And for heaven's sake, when someone or something dies, don't say
good bye.
Say hello, and send them your sorrow, they will receive it as love.
For no one ever goes anywhere else but HERE.
And maybe, just maybe, if you do it right, you can keep that
connection line open and flowing for real, across the trans life time
barrier.
Wouldn't that be a hoot?
Better than moving the marble on the table, eh?
But the price is willingness to flow the full power of your being
and your FEELING across that line.
If you shut down who and what you are, you shut down the reach of
your connection lines.
After a while, they can barely travel around in this life, let
alone into the next.
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
Friday, November 30, 2012
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
MANIFEST AND UNMANIFEST
MANIFEST AND UNMANIFEST
ACT - 21
6 October 1993
Copyright (C) 1993 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes
It is open to question whether anyone can go first dynamic clear
within a 4th dynamic that is itself not also clear.
What is clear?
Clear is the absence of aberration.
What is aberration?
Aberration is enforced Basic Truth.
What is Basic Truth or Native State?
Basic Truth is silence and being unmanifest.
Native state is latent, potential power and ability to manifest,
with nothing yet manifested.
Enforced Basic Truth, is enforced unmanifestation.
Suppression is basically the effort to make you not manifest
anything.
No sound nor voice, no communication, no creation, no doingness of
any kind.
Suppression is the effort to make you not be and to kick you out of
the game for good.
Suppression is the effort to return you to Native State against
your will in such a way that you can not leave it, and failing this, to
enslave you into trying to do the same to others.
First they try to make you not manifest, then failing that, they
try to make you manifest making others not manifest.
A being is free and clear to the degree that he can manifest and
not manifest at will.
Everytime the government makes you do something that you really
don't want to do or prevents you from doing something you really do want
to do, it lays in charge on the channels of aberration that overwhelm
you and make you sick.
Aberration is not going in a straight line from A to B. Your basic
goals expect some opposition, but the game is no fun anymore when you
get overwhelmed repeatedly and without hope of improvement.
Thus trying to go clear on the first and second dynamic all the the
while coping with the government trying to send you off to some foreign
war or another, or making you pay income tax, or screwing around with
the business cycle, or making your favorite weed illegal, is quite a
task.
You see the government is not able to make YOU not manifest. It's
not in the constitution that they can do this to you. So instead they
enslave you and try to make you make OTHERS not manifest. That's not in
the constitution either, but it can seem that way, especially if the
government claims that making others not manifest will protect it and
allow it to continue to manifest itself.
When you point a gun at an enemy soldier and pull the trigger you
are trying to make him not manifest.
Thus during a war the government's game becomes making you manifest
that other's not manifest.
Trying to go clear in this atmosphere is ridiculous.
Thus one might put some attention on clearing the fourth dynamic
BEFORE one tries to go clear as himself on the first dynamic.
Now you DO have some help in this regard.
Namely that the fourth dynamic is ALREADY CLEAR. At least the
documents which define the fourth dynamic game are very clear
themselves, even if they weren't written by people who themselves were
clear.
It quite often happens that people in a lucid state can write very
clear documents and technology which is even higher than they themselves
can manifest for long. LRH for example.
Thus you have the constitution which says we all have the right to
life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness written by people who owned
slaves.
This does not in any way invalidate the clarity of the documents so
written.
Thus fortunately for us we have a ceiling of CLEAR already in place
for us to work within. It's just that everyone under that ceiling is
thumbing their noses at the constitution and thus making life very hard
for the rest of us trying to go clear on the first dynamic.
THE EXCALIBUR RUNDOWN (7th dynamic clear)
The whole subject of being able to see other beings directly, not
by their bodies, but by their thetans, has to do with this subject of
manifesting and not manifesting.
Basically people can't see other beings because they are trying to
kick them out of their game without admitting they let them in.
You see the first time you ever saw any particular being was when
you decided to let them into your game. The fact that you saw them
there, was evidence to you that they were in your game WITH YOUR
PERMISSION.
Later efforts to kick them back out again without admitting that
you let them in, finally led to blindness and not being able to see
beings at all.
It's fine for you to say 'Yes I know I let you in, but I have
changed my mind, now I want you out.' But instead you say 'Hey, I didn't
let YOU in, now get the hell out!'
And so by denying that he let the being in, he creates a wall
behind the being in the time stream that prevents him from kicking the
being out.
The wall consists of his own blindness to the earlier moment when
he did in fact let the being in.
This is how it works. A thetan is CAUSE. Any being, to come into
your dream, must first be out. In order to come in, you must CAUSE him
to come in. But before you cause him to come in, since he is already
out, you are CAUSING him to be out. There is nothing that is not
caused. What ever IS, as it relates to you, is being caused by you.
Thus in causing a being to come in to your dream, you are really
changing from WILLINGLY CAUSING him to be out of your dream, to
WILLINGLY CAUSING him to be in.
But now what happens when you want him out again? Well you have to
change from WILLINGLY CAUSING him to be in your dream to WILLINGLY
CAUSING him to be out of your dream. But if you go on a tremendous make
wrong and you say to yourself, "I never let you in, I don't want you to
be in, I AM NOT CAUSING YOU TO BE IN, I just want you out, now YOU get
out right now!" it will never work.
That's because you are denying that you are presently WILLINGLY
CAUSING HIM TO BE IN YOUR DREAM. If you aren't causing him to be in,
you can never cause him to be out.
Even if you ARE causing him to be in, but you just SAY you aren't,
that's enough to screw up your cause lines so you can't do anything with
that being any more except suffer its onslaught.
Cause to a thetan is always WILLINGNESS. Desire is sovereign, it
doesn't even take effort. It merely takes WANTING.
If you are able to admit that you are WILLINGLY CAUSING the being
to be in your dream, you can change your mind and WILLINGLY CAUSE the
being to be out of your dream.
If you say instead "No way man, not me, I HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH
THIS, I WOULDN'T HAVE HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS, I COULDN'T HAVE HAD
ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE I HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS
BECAUSE I AM NOT ABLE TO HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS, AND I WILL
PERSONALLY KILL ANYONE WHO DID HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS' well then
you are stuck with 'this' because you had nothing to do with it.
The Christian's travail with the Devil can be summed up as "I
didn't create you, now how do I uncreate you?' That's the sum totality
of it. They are Devil's Food, everyone.
Men only hang on crosses they 'didn't build'.
Even if they didn't build their crosses themselves, they certainly
commissioned them being built by others, by chosing to enter into
other's dreams and allow others into their own.
So there is an attitude problem here. If you want someone to leave
your game, fine, just admit you let them in, change your mind about
wanting them in, and out they go.
But the moment you develop a PROBLEM with having let them in and
you say, 'I didn't let you in, not me' then you are stuck with them
forever more.
The way in is the way out. If there WAS no way in, there IS no way
out.
So the key moment that a being was able to see other beings
directly was when he first let them in and they came in and he verified
it by looking at them.
The key moment that a being was NOT able to see other beings was
soon after the first moment he conceived that he hadn't let them in, in
the first place. This sticks him with them forever more, because as far
as he is concerned the doorway IN doesn't exist, so the doorway out
doesn't exist either.
The main reason this ends up in not being able to see other beings,
is because after the failure to kick someone out, there follows all
kinds of efforts to not-is the being you want out, by PRETENDING he
already IS out, or doesn't exist now and never was in.
If you could see other beings directly, think how many of them
would be beings you really wished weren't here and are desperately
trying to get rid of.
So the basic actions of a thetan are manifesting and not
manifesting, and percieving other's manifestations and non
manifestations.
The basic suppressive game between thetans is manifesting in the
direction of making others not manifest. When others do this to you
this draws YOU into the game of manifesting to make THEM not manifest
too!
That's called suppressing the suppressives or vanquishing the
vanquishers.
It's also the final trap, because the main (wrong) way to stop
another being from manifesting is covering him with your beingness and
squashing the hell out of him with force. If you let go, he will just
go back to doing whatever it was you detested, and probably pay you back
to boot.
So once you start squashing beings like this you can never let them
go. NEVER. And if you do, boy do you get it back!
So after a trillion years and a trillion beings all squashed into
yourself to keep them from manifesting, you become a sodden composite
that is very hard to clear and even harder to get along with.
It's called being a BT graveyard.
BT stands for Body Thetan, but the phenomenon is wider than just
your body.
After a while you have so much energy tied up in squashing other
beings and holding them to you, that you don't have any energy left for
yourself or to defend yourself against others, and so one day someone
else grabs YOU and squashes you to himself and that's the end of you.
Now if you would just let go of the guys you are entombing, you
might have a chance getting out of the tomb others are putting you in.
Of course all these beings you are clustering yourself with are
'invisible' to you, because of the not-is you are squashing them with,
which is born of your determination that they not exist and not
manifest, along with your inability to admit you let them in to your
dream, and your resultant inability to kick them out for real and for
good.
You don't have to be stuck with anyone or anything you don't want
to be stuck with, if only you will admit to letting it in.
People are so convinced that they didn't let all these things in,
that they can't afford to even admit they are there any more, so you get
your denial case, the prove it case, the scam case etc., all different
flavors of the same basic stupidity.
'Here it is, I can't stand it, I didn't create it or let it in, so
I will just pretend it ain't.'
They are afraid that if they open any doors to let things out, they
might get stuck with more things COMING IN that they can never let out.
Thus they won't admit they ever let anything in, it was 'always just
there' for them, so they have no responsibility for it, so all they can
do is fight these things forever more.
It's really quite noble of them. Each being is a walking grave
yard for all the horrible things he wanted to kick out of the game, but
couldn't quite come around to admitting he let in.
So he becomes them and keeps them with him forever more, buried
deep within his chest, heart, body and being.
This IS hell.
All the demons that attack you when you are dying were carried
along by you your whole life, and kept buried deep within your heart
until you were too week to hold them in any more. Then you get their
payback.
If you want to get rid of them, LET THEM IN.
That will open the door all the way, and they will leave.
Yes a few more might come in while the door is open, but they will
leave too eventually, and the concentration of them will lower
drastically over time.
If instead you open the door and grab each evil thing that comes in
and say 'Where the hell did YOU come from?' and hold it to your heart
swearing to protect mankind for ever more from its evil influence, then
you are merely adding another evil spirit to the mausoleum you call
yourself.
That's the theory in any case.
It's a bit much for your average grown man to stomach.
That's why it is kept secret.
Most adults are a sham. They think they are mature, but really
they got no idea.
Run it with,
'Who or what are you blinding yourself too?'
'Are you withholding another being?'
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
ACT - 21
6 October 1993
Copyright (C) 1993 Homer Wilson Smith
Redistribution rights granted for non commercial purposes
It is open to question whether anyone can go first dynamic clear
within a 4th dynamic that is itself not also clear.
What is clear?
Clear is the absence of aberration.
What is aberration?
Aberration is enforced Basic Truth.
What is Basic Truth or Native State?
Basic Truth is silence and being unmanifest.
Native state is latent, potential power and ability to manifest,
with nothing yet manifested.
Enforced Basic Truth, is enforced unmanifestation.
Suppression is basically the effort to make you not manifest
anything.
No sound nor voice, no communication, no creation, no doingness of
any kind.
Suppression is the effort to make you not be and to kick you out of
the game for good.
Suppression is the effort to return you to Native State against
your will in such a way that you can not leave it, and failing this, to
enslave you into trying to do the same to others.
First they try to make you not manifest, then failing that, they
try to make you manifest making others not manifest.
A being is free and clear to the degree that he can manifest and
not manifest at will.
Everytime the government makes you do something that you really
don't want to do or prevents you from doing something you really do want
to do, it lays in charge on the channels of aberration that overwhelm
you and make you sick.
Aberration is not going in a straight line from A to B. Your basic
goals expect some opposition, but the game is no fun anymore when you
get overwhelmed repeatedly and without hope of improvement.
Thus trying to go clear on the first and second dynamic all the the
while coping with the government trying to send you off to some foreign
war or another, or making you pay income tax, or screwing around with
the business cycle, or making your favorite weed illegal, is quite a
task.
You see the government is not able to make YOU not manifest. It's
not in the constitution that they can do this to you. So instead they
enslave you and try to make you make OTHERS not manifest. That's not in
the constitution either, but it can seem that way, especially if the
government claims that making others not manifest will protect it and
allow it to continue to manifest itself.
When you point a gun at an enemy soldier and pull the trigger you
are trying to make him not manifest.
Thus during a war the government's game becomes making you manifest
that other's not manifest.
Trying to go clear in this atmosphere is ridiculous.
Thus one might put some attention on clearing the fourth dynamic
BEFORE one tries to go clear as himself on the first dynamic.
Now you DO have some help in this regard.
Namely that the fourth dynamic is ALREADY CLEAR. At least the
documents which define the fourth dynamic game are very clear
themselves, even if they weren't written by people who themselves were
clear.
It quite often happens that people in a lucid state can write very
clear documents and technology which is even higher than they themselves
can manifest for long. LRH for example.
Thus you have the constitution which says we all have the right to
life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness written by people who owned
slaves.
This does not in any way invalidate the clarity of the documents so
written.
Thus fortunately for us we have a ceiling of CLEAR already in place
for us to work within. It's just that everyone under that ceiling is
thumbing their noses at the constitution and thus making life very hard
for the rest of us trying to go clear on the first dynamic.
THE EXCALIBUR RUNDOWN (7th dynamic clear)
The whole subject of being able to see other beings directly, not
by their bodies, but by their thetans, has to do with this subject of
manifesting and not manifesting.
Basically people can't see other beings because they are trying to
kick them out of their game without admitting they let them in.
You see the first time you ever saw any particular being was when
you decided to let them into your game. The fact that you saw them
there, was evidence to you that they were in your game WITH YOUR
PERMISSION.
Later efforts to kick them back out again without admitting that
you let them in, finally led to blindness and not being able to see
beings at all.
It's fine for you to say 'Yes I know I let you in, but I have
changed my mind, now I want you out.' But instead you say 'Hey, I didn't
let YOU in, now get the hell out!'
And so by denying that he let the being in, he creates a wall
behind the being in the time stream that prevents him from kicking the
being out.
The wall consists of his own blindness to the earlier moment when
he did in fact let the being in.
This is how it works. A thetan is CAUSE. Any being, to come into
your dream, must first be out. In order to come in, you must CAUSE him
to come in. But before you cause him to come in, since he is already
out, you are CAUSING him to be out. There is nothing that is not
caused. What ever IS, as it relates to you, is being caused by you.
Thus in causing a being to come in to your dream, you are really
changing from WILLINGLY CAUSING him to be out of your dream, to
WILLINGLY CAUSING him to be in.
But now what happens when you want him out again? Well you have to
change from WILLINGLY CAUSING him to be in your dream to WILLINGLY
CAUSING him to be out of your dream. But if you go on a tremendous make
wrong and you say to yourself, "I never let you in, I don't want you to
be in, I AM NOT CAUSING YOU TO BE IN, I just want you out, now YOU get
out right now!" it will never work.
That's because you are denying that you are presently WILLINGLY
CAUSING HIM TO BE IN YOUR DREAM. If you aren't causing him to be in,
you can never cause him to be out.
Even if you ARE causing him to be in, but you just SAY you aren't,
that's enough to screw up your cause lines so you can't do anything with
that being any more except suffer its onslaught.
Cause to a thetan is always WILLINGNESS. Desire is sovereign, it
doesn't even take effort. It merely takes WANTING.
If you are able to admit that you are WILLINGLY CAUSING the being
to be in your dream, you can change your mind and WILLINGLY CAUSE the
being to be out of your dream.
If you say instead "No way man, not me, I HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH
THIS, I WOULDN'T HAVE HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS, I COULDN'T HAVE HAD
ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE I HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS
BECAUSE I AM NOT ABLE TO HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS, AND I WILL
PERSONALLY KILL ANYONE WHO DID HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THIS' well then
you are stuck with 'this' because you had nothing to do with it.
The Christian's travail with the Devil can be summed up as "I
didn't create you, now how do I uncreate you?' That's the sum totality
of it. They are Devil's Food, everyone.
Men only hang on crosses they 'didn't build'.
Even if they didn't build their crosses themselves, they certainly
commissioned them being built by others, by chosing to enter into
other's dreams and allow others into their own.
So there is an attitude problem here. If you want someone to leave
your game, fine, just admit you let them in, change your mind about
wanting them in, and out they go.
But the moment you develop a PROBLEM with having let them in and
you say, 'I didn't let you in, not me' then you are stuck with them
forever more.
The way in is the way out. If there WAS no way in, there IS no way
out.
So the key moment that a being was able to see other beings
directly was when he first let them in and they came in and he verified
it by looking at them.
The key moment that a being was NOT able to see other beings was
soon after the first moment he conceived that he hadn't let them in, in
the first place. This sticks him with them forever more, because as far
as he is concerned the doorway IN doesn't exist, so the doorway out
doesn't exist either.
The main reason this ends up in not being able to see other beings,
is because after the failure to kick someone out, there follows all
kinds of efforts to not-is the being you want out, by PRETENDING he
already IS out, or doesn't exist now and never was in.
If you could see other beings directly, think how many of them
would be beings you really wished weren't here and are desperately
trying to get rid of.
So the basic actions of a thetan are manifesting and not
manifesting, and percieving other's manifestations and non
manifestations.
The basic suppressive game between thetans is manifesting in the
direction of making others not manifest. When others do this to you
this draws YOU into the game of manifesting to make THEM not manifest
too!
That's called suppressing the suppressives or vanquishing the
vanquishers.
It's also the final trap, because the main (wrong) way to stop
another being from manifesting is covering him with your beingness and
squashing the hell out of him with force. If you let go, he will just
go back to doing whatever it was you detested, and probably pay you back
to boot.
So once you start squashing beings like this you can never let them
go. NEVER. And if you do, boy do you get it back!
So after a trillion years and a trillion beings all squashed into
yourself to keep them from manifesting, you become a sodden composite
that is very hard to clear and even harder to get along with.
It's called being a BT graveyard.
BT stands for Body Thetan, but the phenomenon is wider than just
your body.
After a while you have so much energy tied up in squashing other
beings and holding them to you, that you don't have any energy left for
yourself or to defend yourself against others, and so one day someone
else grabs YOU and squashes you to himself and that's the end of you.
Now if you would just let go of the guys you are entombing, you
might have a chance getting out of the tomb others are putting you in.
Of course all these beings you are clustering yourself with are
'invisible' to you, because of the not-is you are squashing them with,
which is born of your determination that they not exist and not
manifest, along with your inability to admit you let them in to your
dream, and your resultant inability to kick them out for real and for
good.
You don't have to be stuck with anyone or anything you don't want
to be stuck with, if only you will admit to letting it in.
People are so convinced that they didn't let all these things in,
that they can't afford to even admit they are there any more, so you get
your denial case, the prove it case, the scam case etc., all different
flavors of the same basic stupidity.
'Here it is, I can't stand it, I didn't create it or let it in, so
I will just pretend it ain't.'
They are afraid that if they open any doors to let things out, they
might get stuck with more things COMING IN that they can never let out.
Thus they won't admit they ever let anything in, it was 'always just
there' for them, so they have no responsibility for it, so all they can
do is fight these things forever more.
It's really quite noble of them. Each being is a walking grave
yard for all the horrible things he wanted to kick out of the game, but
couldn't quite come around to admitting he let in.
So he becomes them and keeps them with him forever more, buried
deep within his chest, heart, body and being.
This IS hell.
All the demons that attack you when you are dying were carried
along by you your whole life, and kept buried deep within your heart
until you were too week to hold them in any more. Then you get their
payback.
If you want to get rid of them, LET THEM IN.
That will open the door all the way, and they will leave.
Yes a few more might come in while the door is open, but they will
leave too eventually, and the concentration of them will lower
drastically over time.
If instead you open the door and grab each evil thing that comes in
and say 'Where the hell did YOU come from?' and hold it to your heart
swearing to protect mankind for ever more from its evil influence, then
you are merely adding another evil spirit to the mausoleum you call
yourself.
That's the theory in any case.
It's a bit much for your average grown man to stomach.
That's why it is kept secret.
Most adults are a sham. They think they are mature, but really
they got no idea.
Run it with,
'Who or what are you blinding yourself too?'
'Are you withholding another being?'
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
Monday, November 26, 2012
TO RUN
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
TO RUN
I am asked below to define what TO RUN means.
First we need to word clear the standard term
TO PROCESS and
A PROCESS
Scientifically a process is a change of state or a series
of changes of state, such as the process of energy escaping from
the main spring of a clock as it winds down.
To process is to put something through a process, or a series
of changes of state. To process food for example, by homogenizing it,
chopping it up, exposing to ultra violet etc. The end result is more
desirable than the original raw state.
To process a human case, as in a preclear, we get the preclear
to engage in a series of actions, either physical or mental,
that cause charge to come to the surface for inspection, reevaluation
and thus erasure.
Any particular series of actions that a preclear is requested
to perform towards this goal is called 'a process', as it puts
the preclear though changes in state toward a better end.
To 'run' a process comes from the term to run a program on
a computer. Again a computer program is a series of instructions
causing the computer to engage in various actions like adding numbers,
putting them here and there, printing them out etc.
A program for a computer is very much like a program for a preclear,
a series of actions the computer or preclear are requested to do in
order to change their own state or the state of something else.
Thus we 'run a program' on a computer, or we 'run a process on a
preclear', or the preclear runs a process on charge in his bank. We are
processing the preclear or the preclear's bank, by engaging in a series
of actions which bring about a series of changes in the preclear or his
bank (of charge) to a better end, which is the E/P or End Phenomenon of
the process.
When we say run a process, or run an incident, or run the preclear
on an incident, or simply to run 'an item', we are talking about
applying the appropriate process in the appropriate way to the situation
in order to produce case gain.
An item is any idea, person, place or thing that a preclear might
have charge on.
Mother is an item, so is anger, fear, sorrow or apathy.
Goals are items, to be worthwhile, for example.
An item is just about ANYTHING that might have charge on it, or
lead into an area of charge.
An incident is a period of time when charge was built up with
various items in the incident.
A terminal is a PERSON in the incident or the preclear's life.
Thus the term 'run X' is very broadly used, and generally means 'to
do what is right' to handle X.
One runs a process in until no more change comes from it, or the
preclear has a significant cognition about the item or area being
processed, and is feeling better.
The most basic process is simple to spot the item over and over.
"Spot how you feel about your eternal future."
Or to get the idea of:
"Get the idea of being mortal. Get the idea of being immortal.
For those who are heavily into not-isness, making nothing of charge
via force, denial, and blackness, an item might seem to have no charge
on it or be unapproachable.
So then we add NO AND SOME to the item being run in order to get
the preclear to run out the NOT ISING of the item, then run some of the
item, then the not ising of the item, then some of the item, back and
forth.
"Spot NO sorrow over mother's death."
"Spot SOME sorrow over mother's death."
If the preclear is suffering to death on an item, we add in AND to
really get at what the preclear is doing to drive himself crazy.
"Get the idea of wanting to die forever AND wanting to live forever
at the same time."
Some preclear's may need NO and SOME added into AND!
"Get the idea of NO wanting to die AND wanting to live forever at
the same time"
"Get the idea of SOME wanting to die AND wanting to live forever at
the same time."
Serious charge in the bank has 'tricks' of unavailability to the
preclear's attempt to audit it, and this results in the apparency of
unauditability.
The preclear is a 'nothing there' case.
"Get the idea there is nothing there."
"Get the idea there is something there."
If he is really crazy he is running NOTHING AND SOMETHING,
you gotta run the same thing.
'Get the idea there is nothing there AND something there at the
same time forever.'
Running NO and SOME and AND on the unauditable item is usually
enough to break it open.
He wants to live and die at the same time, but he has not-ised that
to a point where if you say 'Tell me an AND', he will say "What AND?"
So you run,
"Get the idea of NO AND."
"Get the idea of SOME AND."
Assuming he knows what an AND is, 20 minutes of that will pop the
next AND into his face and make it ready to run.
Remember an AND is not an indecision, should I go left,
should I go right. That's an OR, and even though it may never
stop, it doesn't use up all his energy, just all his time :)
An AND is a decision to go BOTH LEFT AND RIGHT, and he puts his
full OT power into doing both and thus goes nowhere while burning his
thetan jets bright white.
If he is running and AND on to look or not look, he will be pushing
infinitely hard to not see, and pulling infinitely hard to see.
This forms a mucky clay in front of his face which eventually
shows up as an impenetrable 'nothing there'.
He can't put his attention in it, on it or around it.
HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY ATTENTION LEFT, its all eaten up by the total
effort to push and pull at the same time.
Or to push left and push right at the same time.
Or whatever, ANDS always involve full power, and FORCE AND EFFORT
against each other to produce no motion and no change.
Fully running out the operating AND's on the case will produce
permanent relief beyond one's wildest imagination. But there are a lot
of them, and they are DEADLY, each and every one, and he has about 20 of
them or more that need to be spotted and run to relief.
He is basically trying to GO AND NOT GO in everything in his life.
Running out ALL ANDS from a case produces a being who is no longer
crazy (by definition), and who can feel and operate smoothly again or
not depending on the color of sunset or the mood of the moment which HE
paints on things, not his craziness.
A being filled with ANDS, is always going AND not going, going AND
not going, 24 hours a day, awake or asleep.
He may be going 51 percent and not going 49 percent, so it might
seem he is moving forward, but he is driving with the brakes on, both
pedals to the metal.
And he's always asking a whole mess of questions he is terrified of
knowing the answers to, TO KNOW AND NOT KNOW, TO LEARN AND NOT LEARN, TO
REMEMBER AND NOT REMEMBER, its just on and on, one creates and lives in
one's own hell by being and doing this way.
You can always tell such a preclear by the smell of smoking brakes
and exhaust that pervades his thetan space :)
Outwardly he will tell you he is a black V, inwardly he is white
hot from self generated friction.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
> Homer,
>
> I read the article on "Unauditabilty" and wondered if you could explain the
> term "run" a little more. I have read this word in your previous articles
> and still do not completely understand what we are doing when we run a
> situation. I get the process of "some" and "none" in a run but what is the
> ultimate goal of the "some" and "none" in the audit? Is the run the
> attempt to alleviate the charge from whatever is being run?
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Nov 26 20:38:53 EST 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore921.memo
Send mail to archive.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning but
Not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQtBmuURT1lqxE3HERAirkAJ9hugCtdwxZ9fBmMaJlYZ1p9fyHOQCgyZCl
BsVxzQ06E1SbxfrherAF+eg=
=gMbX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
TO RUN
I am asked below to define what TO RUN means.
First we need to word clear the standard term
TO PROCESS and
A PROCESS
Scientifically a process is a change of state or a series
of changes of state, such as the process of energy escaping from
the main spring of a clock as it winds down.
To process is to put something through a process, or a series
of changes of state. To process food for example, by homogenizing it,
chopping it up, exposing to ultra violet etc. The end result is more
desirable than the original raw state.
To process a human case, as in a preclear, we get the preclear
to engage in a series of actions, either physical or mental,
that cause charge to come to the surface for inspection, reevaluation
and thus erasure.
Any particular series of actions that a preclear is requested
to perform towards this goal is called 'a process', as it puts
the preclear though changes in state toward a better end.
To 'run' a process comes from the term to run a program on
a computer. Again a computer program is a series of instructions
causing the computer to engage in various actions like adding numbers,
putting them here and there, printing them out etc.
A program for a computer is very much like a program for a preclear,
a series of actions the computer or preclear are requested to do in
order to change their own state or the state of something else.
Thus we 'run a program' on a computer, or we 'run a process on a
preclear', or the preclear runs a process on charge in his bank. We are
processing the preclear or the preclear's bank, by engaging in a series
of actions which bring about a series of changes in the preclear or his
bank (of charge) to a better end, which is the E/P or End Phenomenon of
the process.
When we say run a process, or run an incident, or run the preclear
on an incident, or simply to run 'an item', we are talking about
applying the appropriate process in the appropriate way to the situation
in order to produce case gain.
An item is any idea, person, place or thing that a preclear might
have charge on.
Mother is an item, so is anger, fear, sorrow or apathy.
Goals are items, to be worthwhile, for example.
An item is just about ANYTHING that might have charge on it, or
lead into an area of charge.
An incident is a period of time when charge was built up with
various items in the incident.
A terminal is a PERSON in the incident or the preclear's life.
Thus the term 'run X' is very broadly used, and generally means 'to
do what is right' to handle X.
One runs a process in until no more change comes from it, or the
preclear has a significant cognition about the item or area being
processed, and is feeling better.
The most basic process is simple to spot the item over and over.
"Spot how you feel about your eternal future."
Or to get the idea of:
"Get the idea of being mortal. Get the idea of being immortal.
For those who are heavily into not-isness, making nothing of charge
via force, denial, and blackness, an item might seem to have no charge
on it or be unapproachable.
So then we add NO AND SOME to the item being run in order to get
the preclear to run out the NOT ISING of the item, then run some of the
item, then the not ising of the item, then some of the item, back and
forth.
"Spot NO sorrow over mother's death."
"Spot SOME sorrow over mother's death."
If the preclear is suffering to death on an item, we add in AND to
really get at what the preclear is doing to drive himself crazy.
"Get the idea of wanting to die forever AND wanting to live forever
at the same time."
Some preclear's may need NO and SOME added into AND!
"Get the idea of NO wanting to die AND wanting to live forever at
the same time"
"Get the idea of SOME wanting to die AND wanting to live forever at
the same time."
Serious charge in the bank has 'tricks' of unavailability to the
preclear's attempt to audit it, and this results in the apparency of
unauditability.
The preclear is a 'nothing there' case.
"Get the idea there is nothing there."
"Get the idea there is something there."
If he is really crazy he is running NOTHING AND SOMETHING,
you gotta run the same thing.
'Get the idea there is nothing there AND something there at the
same time forever.'
Running NO and SOME and AND on the unauditable item is usually
enough to break it open.
He wants to live and die at the same time, but he has not-ised that
to a point where if you say 'Tell me an AND', he will say "What AND?"
So you run,
"Get the idea of NO AND."
"Get the idea of SOME AND."
Assuming he knows what an AND is, 20 minutes of that will pop the
next AND into his face and make it ready to run.
Remember an AND is not an indecision, should I go left,
should I go right. That's an OR, and even though it may never
stop, it doesn't use up all his energy, just all his time :)
An AND is a decision to go BOTH LEFT AND RIGHT, and he puts his
full OT power into doing both and thus goes nowhere while burning his
thetan jets bright white.
If he is running and AND on to look or not look, he will be pushing
infinitely hard to not see, and pulling infinitely hard to see.
This forms a mucky clay in front of his face which eventually
shows up as an impenetrable 'nothing there'.
He can't put his attention in it, on it or around it.
HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY ATTENTION LEFT, its all eaten up by the total
effort to push and pull at the same time.
Or to push left and push right at the same time.
Or whatever, ANDS always involve full power, and FORCE AND EFFORT
against each other to produce no motion and no change.
Fully running out the operating AND's on the case will produce
permanent relief beyond one's wildest imagination. But there are a lot
of them, and they are DEADLY, each and every one, and he has about 20 of
them or more that need to be spotted and run to relief.
He is basically trying to GO AND NOT GO in everything in his life.
Running out ALL ANDS from a case produces a being who is no longer
crazy (by definition), and who can feel and operate smoothly again or
not depending on the color of sunset or the mood of the moment which HE
paints on things, not his craziness.
A being filled with ANDS, is always going AND not going, going AND
not going, 24 hours a day, awake or asleep.
He may be going 51 percent and not going 49 percent, so it might
seem he is moving forward, but he is driving with the brakes on, both
pedals to the metal.
And he's always asking a whole mess of questions he is terrified of
knowing the answers to, TO KNOW AND NOT KNOW, TO LEARN AND NOT LEARN, TO
REMEMBER AND NOT REMEMBER, its just on and on, one creates and lives in
one's own hell by being and doing this way.
You can always tell such a preclear by the smell of smoking brakes
and exhaust that pervades his thetan space :)
Outwardly he will tell you he is a black V, inwardly he is white
hot from self generated friction.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
> Homer,
>
> I read the article on "Unauditabilty" and wondered if you could explain the
> term "run" a little more. I have read this word in your previous articles
> and still do not completely understand what we are doing when we run a
> situation. I get the process of "some" and "none" in a run but what is the
> ultimate goal of the "some" and "none" in the audit? Is the run the
> attempt to alleviate the charge from whatever is being run?
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Nov 26 20:38:53 EST 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore921.memo
Send mail to archive.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning but
Not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQtBmuURT1lqxE3HERAirkAJ9hugCtdwxZ9fBmMaJlYZ1p9fyHOQCgyZCl
BsVxzQ06E1SbxfrherAF+eg=
=gMbX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
UNAUDITABILITY
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
UNAUDITABILITY
This was written on 8/03/1999 but got lost in the system.
The below is complicated, probably more so than it needs to be.
Presently I would run ANDS instead.
MUST NOT KNOW *AND* MUST KNOW at the same time forever.
Homer
> So there are 2 ways - steadily improve your average tone, without worrying
> about
> the small things as they will drop out by themselves. Or have some
> solo tech to apply during the low tone. Do you know any?
> Nothing solo works for me in low tone. This is like cold - you
> have to wait some time before it vanishes by itself. During
> this time you sneeze here and there inevitably. How to
> control low toned condition?
There may be central cores to our cases that are 'unauditable', one
has to wait through them. Try to run 'unauditability' as an item. Also
waiting and enduring.
Remember every item of importance has an anti item.
Future - Anti Future
Get the idea of a future.
Get the idea of an anti future.
etc.
Sometimes the anti items are totally non obvious, but running
them produces *MARKED* results anyhow.
Sovereignty - Anti Sovereignty
Adoration - Anti Adoration
Operation - Anti Operation
Class - Anti Class
Majesty - Anti Majesty
Pride - Anti Pride
Magnificence - Anti Magnificence
Glory - Anti Glory
Source - Anti Source
Respect - Anti Respect
Tragedy - Anti Tragedy
Travesty - Anti Travesty
Ludicrous - Anti Ludicrous
Demise - Anti Demise
Agony - Anti Agony
Ecstasy - Anti Ecstasy
Golden Temper - Anti Golden Temper
Romance - Anti Romance
Thrill - Anti Thrill
Sin Song - Anti Sin Song
Joke - Anti Joke
Imp Soul - Anti Imp Soul
Humor - Anti Humor
Halcyon - Anti Halcyon
High Cool - High Anti Cool
High Friend - High Anti Friend
Miracle - Anti Miracle
King - Anti King
Get used to swinging wide on both sides of the dicoms
that you run into.
If you have an ascension experience, run the descension
experience! If you have a descension experience, run the
ascension experience! They come in pairs.
Don't use opposites like good and bad, use the anti form
Ascension - Anti Ascension
Descension - Anti Descension
Good - Anti Good
Bad - Anti Bad
This isn't a solo process so much as a way to live life and
field the curve balls it is throwing you.
Life - Anti Life
Don't let an important concept go by without running both sides of it,
*DEEPLY* and beyond when you might think it is flat.
Important - Anti Important
Unimportant - Anti Unimportant
Also remember there is not-isness producing a 'No' Item.
No can mean truly not there, but it usually means No at
the bottom of the CDEINR scale. Pretended not there.
No Importance - No Anti Importance
The basic form is
Postulate - Anti Postulate
No Postulate - No Anti Postulate
Take any subject.
Pretty girls.
"Is there a postulate on pretty girls?"
"Is there an anti postulate on pretty girls?"
"is there a no postulate on pretty girls?"
"Is there a no anti postulate on pretty girls?"
You don't have to get *WHAT* the postulate is, you want the FORCE on
both sides of the postulates. The actual what may or may not come to you.
It's the force that you are killing yourself with, particularly the 'no'
part of the force.
Its one thing to be operating postulates and anti postulates and know
it, and quite another to be operating no postulates and no anti postulates
and not know it! Something else is creating the world and our condition
in it right?
Anti postulates are necessary to produce an ongoing space time
game stream, so trying to get rid of anti postulates is fool hardy,
but running them and reoptimzing their balance against the postulates
can work miracles.
You want to get to your car, that's a postulate. But you can't just
get there by wanting it, desire isn't sovereign for a while, you have to
*WALK* to your car. That's an anti postulate.
Most people are unaware of postulates and anti postulates, so they
need to run No Postulate - No Anti Postulate first, until the come up to
recognizing that postulates and anti postulates are all that exist and
cause anything. It's not a head cognition, they *SEE* it all of a sudden,
and they see they are operating both sides of operation and anti operation
and they been anti operating THAT for a long time too!
Try
Source - Anti Source
Sovereign Source - Anti Sovereign Source
Sovereign Anti Source - Anti Sovereign Anti Source
Don't ask 'What the !@#@#% does that mean?'
Run the item, let existence show you what it means. Don't presume to
know. Existence is *WAY BIG*, it has more to offer us than we can know
until we get it. Knowing what there is to know is a covert way of not
knowing what there is to know and how much we don't know.
Also remember Adore defines a Miracle as
The *UNDREAMED* dream come true.
If you know what you want, it ain't no miracle if you get it,
no matter what it is.
What there is to have and get is *WAY* beyond our comprehension in the
not have state, let existence give it to you without knowing what it is
before you have it. That produces havingness that is just out of this
world. It's the undreamed dream come true that results in Joy in Eternal
Miracles.
Miracle - Anti Miracle
No Miracle - No Anti Miracle
JOY is Joke's On You.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Nov 26 03:06:02 EST 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore667.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQsyLqURT1lqxE3HERArATAJ0fk5/LeUBwY6cUzHvbw/N5okURdQCeL03h
CUDn9tuDU26YK4P/KQZRohE=
=jQ84
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
UNAUDITABILITY
This was written on 8/03/1999 but got lost in the system.
The below is complicated, probably more so than it needs to be.
Presently I would run ANDS instead.
MUST NOT KNOW *AND* MUST KNOW at the same time forever.
Homer
> So there are 2 ways - steadily improve your average tone, without worrying
> about
> the small things as they will drop out by themselves. Or have some
> solo tech to apply during the low tone. Do you know any?
> Nothing solo works for me in low tone. This is like cold - you
> have to wait some time before it vanishes by itself. During
> this time you sneeze here and there inevitably. How to
> control low toned condition?
There may be central cores to our cases that are 'unauditable', one
has to wait through them. Try to run 'unauditability' as an item. Also
waiting and enduring.
Remember every item of importance has an anti item.
Future - Anti Future
Get the idea of a future.
Get the idea of an anti future.
etc.
Sometimes the anti items are totally non obvious, but running
them produces *MARKED* results anyhow.
Sovereignty - Anti Sovereignty
Adoration - Anti Adoration
Operation - Anti Operation
Class - Anti Class
Majesty - Anti Majesty
Pride - Anti Pride
Magnificence - Anti Magnificence
Glory - Anti Glory
Source - Anti Source
Respect - Anti Respect
Tragedy - Anti Tragedy
Travesty - Anti Travesty
Ludicrous - Anti Ludicrous
Demise - Anti Demise
Agony - Anti Agony
Ecstasy - Anti Ecstasy
Golden Temper - Anti Golden Temper
Romance - Anti Romance
Thrill - Anti Thrill
Sin Song - Anti Sin Song
Joke - Anti Joke
Imp Soul - Anti Imp Soul
Humor - Anti Humor
Halcyon - Anti Halcyon
High Cool - High Anti Cool
High Friend - High Anti Friend
Miracle - Anti Miracle
King - Anti King
Get used to swinging wide on both sides of the dicoms
that you run into.
If you have an ascension experience, run the descension
experience! If you have a descension experience, run the
ascension experience! They come in pairs.
Don't use opposites like good and bad, use the anti form
Ascension - Anti Ascension
Descension - Anti Descension
Good - Anti Good
Bad - Anti Bad
This isn't a solo process so much as a way to live life and
field the curve balls it is throwing you.
Life - Anti Life
Don't let an important concept go by without running both sides of it,
*DEEPLY* and beyond when you might think it is flat.
Important - Anti Important
Unimportant - Anti Unimportant
Also remember there is not-isness producing a 'No' Item.
No can mean truly not there, but it usually means No at
the bottom of the CDEINR scale. Pretended not there.
No Importance - No Anti Importance
The basic form is
Postulate - Anti Postulate
No Postulate - No Anti Postulate
Take any subject.
Pretty girls.
"Is there a postulate on pretty girls?"
"Is there an anti postulate on pretty girls?"
"is there a no postulate on pretty girls?"
"Is there a no anti postulate on pretty girls?"
You don't have to get *WHAT* the postulate is, you want the FORCE on
both sides of the postulates. The actual what may or may not come to you.
It's the force that you are killing yourself with, particularly the 'no'
part of the force.
Its one thing to be operating postulates and anti postulates and know
it, and quite another to be operating no postulates and no anti postulates
and not know it! Something else is creating the world and our condition
in it right?
Anti postulates are necessary to produce an ongoing space time
game stream, so trying to get rid of anti postulates is fool hardy,
but running them and reoptimzing their balance against the postulates
can work miracles.
You want to get to your car, that's a postulate. But you can't just
get there by wanting it, desire isn't sovereign for a while, you have to
*WALK* to your car. That's an anti postulate.
Most people are unaware of postulates and anti postulates, so they
need to run No Postulate - No Anti Postulate first, until the come up to
recognizing that postulates and anti postulates are all that exist and
cause anything. It's not a head cognition, they *SEE* it all of a sudden,
and they see they are operating both sides of operation and anti operation
and they been anti operating THAT for a long time too!
Try
Source - Anti Source
Sovereign Source - Anti Sovereign Source
Sovereign Anti Source - Anti Sovereign Anti Source
Don't ask 'What the !@#@#% does that mean?'
Run the item, let existence show you what it means. Don't presume to
know. Existence is *WAY BIG*, it has more to offer us than we can know
until we get it. Knowing what there is to know is a covert way of not
knowing what there is to know and how much we don't know.
Also remember Adore defines a Miracle as
The *UNDREAMED* dream come true.
If you know what you want, it ain't no miracle if you get it,
no matter what it is.
What there is to have and get is *WAY* beyond our comprehension in the
not have state, let existence give it to you without knowing what it is
before you have it. That produces havingness that is just out of this
world. It's the undreamed dream come true that results in Joy in Eternal
Miracles.
Miracle - Anti Miracle
No Miracle - No Anti Miracle
JOY is Joke's On You.
Homer
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Mon Nov 26 03:06:02 EST 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore667.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQsyLqURT1lqxE3HERArATAJ0fk5/LeUBwY6cUzHvbw/N5okURdQCeL03h
CUDn9tuDU26YK4P/KQZRohE=
=jQ84
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
OF CESSPOOLS AND COW PIES
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
OF CESSPOOLS AND COW PIES
This is for the true Scners that read a.r.s list in awe of its vile
underbelly.
Some of that vileness comes from truly malignant meatballs, live
once, die once, that its bud.
They are still trying to die forever by pretending they WILL die at
the end of this body's life.
Many meatballs however are intelligent, they WANT to live forever,
but just don't believe it and for good reason if you understand the
structure of the tone scale and its decent, and the many lies of
duality marbled through many religions on this Earth at this time.
But I suspect the vast majority of vileness pretending to be
intelligent skepticism comes from the raging insane Christian asshole.
They can be known by their creed, but you probably have missed it
on many of the posters here on a.r.s. So you think you are talking to a
reasonable skeptic, but in fact are talking to a Devil's demon, fiddling
the Devil's Tune.
Their creed, the Devil's Tune, is pretty simple,
1.) God made us without our consent, and God can destroy us without
their consent.
2.) God then dumped those he made into a meat grinder called the
physical universe, and judges those by how they behave, regardless of
how the good are hammered by the bad.
3.) God only loves those that obey him, and suck up to his Cult of
Personality, Jesus.
4.) Someone else can pay your ticket for you.
5.) Those that God doesn't like or admire, he judges and then sends
to hell to suffer, either forever, or for a while after which he
destroys the whole seething mess.
6.) The sins of 4 score years are worthy of suffering or being
destroyed forever. This God can't or won't figure out how to save
everyone.
7.) All of life is NOT God itself in carnation.
8.) God and Soul are two different objects.
9.) Their Holy Book superceeds direct scientific evidence. They
have a strong tendency to write the Book first, and do the science
second, and then reject the science that disagrees with their Book.
10.) They walk around with a HORRENDOUS case of amnesia,
and claim that because THEY can't remember their past, it
didn't happen, and if YOU remember your past, you are deluded by
the Devil.
11.) You never feel good around these people, because they can not
bond with those they are SURE are going to hell forever. Nor can
they bond with those they think MIGHT go to hell forever, which is
everyone, for there is no way to know if you are saved until
after you die.
12.) So they pray hard, repent hard, sin hard, and go spinning down
the toilet of total irresponsibility for condition.
13.) Their greatest fear of admitting they have lived before,
is their fear they will come back in their next life as a Jew or Muslim.
Homer
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Tue Nov 8 22:49:52 EST 2011
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Nov 23 03:06:02 EST 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore881.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQry5qURT1lqxE3HERAi+QAJ422z7XBMRQhIHVM8LUX7p70hpUogCfZwHm
3EDNNViPOVk8pUD0QZAdNuw=
=uhxx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
OF CESSPOOLS AND COW PIES
This is for the true Scners that read a.r.s list in awe of its vile
underbelly.
Some of that vileness comes from truly malignant meatballs, live
once, die once, that its bud.
They are still trying to die forever by pretending they WILL die at
the end of this body's life.
Many meatballs however are intelligent, they WANT to live forever,
but just don't believe it and for good reason if you understand the
structure of the tone scale and its decent, and the many lies of
duality marbled through many religions on this Earth at this time.
But I suspect the vast majority of vileness pretending to be
intelligent skepticism comes from the raging insane Christian asshole.
They can be known by their creed, but you probably have missed it
on many of the posters here on a.r.s. So you think you are talking to a
reasonable skeptic, but in fact are talking to a Devil's demon, fiddling
the Devil's Tune.
Their creed, the Devil's Tune, is pretty simple,
1.) God made us without our consent, and God can destroy us without
their consent.
2.) God then dumped those he made into a meat grinder called the
physical universe, and judges those by how they behave, regardless of
how the good are hammered by the bad.
3.) God only loves those that obey him, and suck up to his Cult of
Personality, Jesus.
4.) Someone else can pay your ticket for you.
5.) Those that God doesn't like or admire, he judges and then sends
to hell to suffer, either forever, or for a while after which he
destroys the whole seething mess.
6.) The sins of 4 score years are worthy of suffering or being
destroyed forever. This God can't or won't figure out how to save
everyone.
7.) All of life is NOT God itself in carnation.
8.) God and Soul are two different objects.
9.) Their Holy Book superceeds direct scientific evidence. They
have a strong tendency to write the Book first, and do the science
second, and then reject the science that disagrees with their Book.
10.) They walk around with a HORRENDOUS case of amnesia,
and claim that because THEY can't remember their past, it
didn't happen, and if YOU remember your past, you are deluded by
the Devil.
11.) You never feel good around these people, because they can not
bond with those they are SURE are going to hell forever. Nor can
they bond with those they think MIGHT go to hell forever, which is
everyone, for there is no way to know if you are saved until
after you die.
12.) So they pray hard, repent hard, sin hard, and go spinning down
the toilet of total irresponsibility for condition.
13.) Their greatest fear of admitting they have lived before,
is their fear they will come back in their next life as a Jew or Muslim.
Homer
- --
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Tue Nov 8 22:49:52 EST 2011
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Fri Nov 23 03:06:02 EST 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore881.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQry5qURT1lqxE3HERAi+QAJ422z7XBMRQhIHVM8LUX7p70hpUogCfZwHm
3EDNNViPOVk8pUD0QZAdNuw=
=uhxx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
DREAM ONE
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
DREAM ONE
I was at someone's house somewhere, somewhen, this wasn't my life,
and we are having a good time.
Suddenly I feel something crawling over my right shoulder and out
of the corner of my right eye I see its legs, it looked like a spider
about the size of a crab.
I looked back at my friend who saw it too, and I said 'These things
don't bite do they?'
I then turned around so I could see my back in a mirror, and the
spider turned out to be a huge beetle with the oversized pincers up
front, and there were hundreds of them of all sizes crawling out from
under my skin on my back and making their way towards my legs and arms.
Pretty soon I am covered with them.
Suddenly a minor flinch or shudder goes through my body, and in
reaction ALL of the beetles bite down hard on my body all over. Total
crushing force everywhere, particularly on my hands and legs.
It was like a massive convulsion of pain.
This lasted about 2 seconds until I consciously released the
flinch, and the beetles let go and went their merry way.
These beetles were big from 1 to 4 inches, and were not poisonous,
like the spiders usually are or the bees, worms and snakes from other
dreams.
As for the flinch it was very tempting to say they bit me first and
I flinched second, there was only a 1/4 second between the two events,
but I could see clearly it was the other way around, I flinched first
and they bit second. Problem was I also saw the flinch was involuntary,
usually I can control the flinch when the bees are walking around in my
ears, but not this time.
DREAM TWO
I am driving down a highway and I notice volcanic fumaroles
starting to blow steam along the sides of the road. As I go along these
are getting greater in number and more insistent.
I finally decide to confront the volcano and take a right hand turn
up a steep hill. We drive up that road for a long time, sparks and foul
smelling gas blowing up all around the car and black char starting to
form on trees and vegetation.
Finally I get to the top, the ground is rumbling and jets are
shooting up everywhere. I walk to the very brim of the volcano and
stand on small ledge on the other side facing the caldera about 2 miles
down.
The caldera is filled with boiling water, with ungodly things
swimming around in it. I thought, you know screw this, I should just
jump in, but I can't stand water I can't see into, flinch is too strong,
I know I would get eaten. Fish with 1000 teeth are worse than beetles.
So I am standing there on this little tiny ledge inside the lip of
the volcano, about 9 feet down from the rim, and the ground starts to
shake and I have NOTHING to hold onto. The ledge is no bigger than my
two feet, all I can do is hold my balance and stand back to the wall,
hoping the volcano doesn't shake me free.
Then the wall and the rock around me starts to grow warm to the
touch and pretty soon I can barely lean back against it, let me tell
you, if you have ever stood on the edge of a building and been afraid of
just falling over for no reason, this was it.
Then a loud voice came out of nowhere and said "It's time to drop
the beings", and I thought to myself, OH God here we go this is OT III!
So I am waiting for them to come out of the sky and dump the beings,
looking forward to the H bomb explosion, anything but the creepy crawly
things, but instead this huge sliding door, it must have been 3 miles
long, opens at the base of the caldera, on the opposite side from me,
just above the level of the water and more ungodly creepy crawly things
are dumped into the steaming water.
I waited and waited, but no beings and no H bomb.
Disappointed I decided I had had enough, and I turned around and
started to make my way back up to the rim of the volcano to the other
side. Although the walls were hot, I knew this was a dream, and I could
stick my hands into the solid rock like it was soft clay, merely by not
flinching about its hardness. I had learned that trick ages ago. I
also commanded the rim to come down a bit to make it more accessible
to me, another trick mastered in my long ago.
When I was out of danger I walked down a little path to a house
where others were waiting, living out their last minutes before the
volcano exploded and I sat down there with them.
It never exploded though and I woke up drenched in giddiness from
the height and fear of falling.
DREAM THREE
I am at some kind of summer camp for grown people, and I notice I
have the ability to move things with my mind.
Usually in these dreams I just get the idea 'Everyone will now take
off their shirts', but this was an all guys camp, so I didn't bother.
I also know I am not supposed to demonstrate these powers, but I
also knew this was a dream so what the hell.
So I start pushing things around, there is a plane in the sky that
is flying along, and I wave at it and it starts to go out of control
coming right for us. My usual joy is to have the plane crash right into
me, but since my revelation that other's might be conscious in my dreams
too, I tend to try and land them properly which I did this time to
everyone's amazement.
Now normally in dreams I can't impress anyone with anything, they
are all dead as, well Jommy Cross, but this time, EVERYONE took notice.
Very serious notice.
Pretty soon there were black helicopters coming out of the sky to
get me, and as one got close I put out my hand causing it to flip and
crash and explode.
As this point I started to understand my life was over, I could
take out one helicopter but not ten or a hundred, and people would be
hounding me and my friends for the rest of my days.
I spent some time trying to figure out how to make it all seem like
a joke so people would forget it, but I realized the jig was up.
I had done it, and they had seen it, and never was it to be
forgotten as some stupid pretense.
As people were crowding in around me, one person was telling me how
foolish I had been to show off my powers, and he asked me what I was
going to do about it?
As thoughts were racing around in my head, I woke up.
By the way over the course of days that these dreams happened they
were interspersed with wonderful dreams about beauty and warm friendship
and the love and joy of holding a child, and way too much sex with way
to young girls.
Zero flinch and zero need to flinch.
Anyhow no need to go into those dreams in detail, wouldn't want to
give the thought police a hard on.
DREAM FOUR
Last night, this was probably the most powerful dream of my life.
I am in an amazing alien city, buildings were massive mile high
edifices stretching to the horizon, made out of silver and stone that
would last forever. I was on a social concourse about half a mile wide
between the left and right hand sides of the street. There was no one
there, no sign of life, it was like the place had just been built.
I am walking down the boulevard, crying my eyes out at how
beautiful and overwhelming the architecture was, and suddenly I notice
that the street is getting warm.
Cracks start to develop, smoke is rising from them, and some of the
stones in the street are glowing red.
I think to myself, Ok, this is it, this whole place is going to go
volcanic any minute. I find myself in bare feet, jumping among the
cooler stones as each one gets hot.
I know I am going to have to confront this one and it is going to
be hard.
Finally there are no more cool stones and I am forced to jump onto
a red hot one. My feet start to burn and I fall to the ground.
The last scene I see my black charred left hand in front of my
face, I know the rest of my body is burned and I am about to go
exterior. My body is now floating on top of a molten street that is
slowly flowing in the direction I had come from, and the huge monolithic
buildings are crumbling all around me.
I woke up.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Fri Feb 26 18:17:18 EST 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Nov 22 03:06:02 EST 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore725.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQrdzqURT1lqxE3HERAk+XAJ40jCJi0A1fWebjeaUTGgkKMSPerACeKnen
cI+p0MbBLcFCElOIFv9XSZc=
=4Jns
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Hash: SHA1
DREAM ONE
I was at someone's house somewhere, somewhen, this wasn't my life,
and we are having a good time.
Suddenly I feel something crawling over my right shoulder and out
of the corner of my right eye I see its legs, it looked like a spider
about the size of a crab.
I looked back at my friend who saw it too, and I said 'These things
don't bite do they?'
I then turned around so I could see my back in a mirror, and the
spider turned out to be a huge beetle with the oversized pincers up
front, and there were hundreds of them of all sizes crawling out from
under my skin on my back and making their way towards my legs and arms.
Pretty soon I am covered with them.
Suddenly a minor flinch or shudder goes through my body, and in
reaction ALL of the beetles bite down hard on my body all over. Total
crushing force everywhere, particularly on my hands and legs.
It was like a massive convulsion of pain.
This lasted about 2 seconds until I consciously released the
flinch, and the beetles let go and went their merry way.
These beetles were big from 1 to 4 inches, and were not poisonous,
like the spiders usually are or the bees, worms and snakes from other
dreams.
As for the flinch it was very tempting to say they bit me first and
I flinched second, there was only a 1/4 second between the two events,
but I could see clearly it was the other way around, I flinched first
and they bit second. Problem was I also saw the flinch was involuntary,
usually I can control the flinch when the bees are walking around in my
ears, but not this time.
DREAM TWO
I am driving down a highway and I notice volcanic fumaroles
starting to blow steam along the sides of the road. As I go along these
are getting greater in number and more insistent.
I finally decide to confront the volcano and take a right hand turn
up a steep hill. We drive up that road for a long time, sparks and foul
smelling gas blowing up all around the car and black char starting to
form on trees and vegetation.
Finally I get to the top, the ground is rumbling and jets are
shooting up everywhere. I walk to the very brim of the volcano and
stand on small ledge on the other side facing the caldera about 2 miles
down.
The caldera is filled with boiling water, with ungodly things
swimming around in it. I thought, you know screw this, I should just
jump in, but I can't stand water I can't see into, flinch is too strong,
I know I would get eaten. Fish with 1000 teeth are worse than beetles.
So I am standing there on this little tiny ledge inside the lip of
the volcano, about 9 feet down from the rim, and the ground starts to
shake and I have NOTHING to hold onto. The ledge is no bigger than my
two feet, all I can do is hold my balance and stand back to the wall,
hoping the volcano doesn't shake me free.
Then the wall and the rock around me starts to grow warm to the
touch and pretty soon I can barely lean back against it, let me tell
you, if you have ever stood on the edge of a building and been afraid of
just falling over for no reason, this was it.
Then a loud voice came out of nowhere and said "It's time to drop
the beings", and I thought to myself, OH God here we go this is OT III!
So I am waiting for them to come out of the sky and dump the beings,
looking forward to the H bomb explosion, anything but the creepy crawly
things, but instead this huge sliding door, it must have been 3 miles
long, opens at the base of the caldera, on the opposite side from me,
just above the level of the water and more ungodly creepy crawly things
are dumped into the steaming water.
I waited and waited, but no beings and no H bomb.
Disappointed I decided I had had enough, and I turned around and
started to make my way back up to the rim of the volcano to the other
side. Although the walls were hot, I knew this was a dream, and I could
stick my hands into the solid rock like it was soft clay, merely by not
flinching about its hardness. I had learned that trick ages ago. I
also commanded the rim to come down a bit to make it more accessible
to me, another trick mastered in my long ago.
When I was out of danger I walked down a little path to a house
where others were waiting, living out their last minutes before the
volcano exploded and I sat down there with them.
It never exploded though and I woke up drenched in giddiness from
the height and fear of falling.
DREAM THREE
I am at some kind of summer camp for grown people, and I notice I
have the ability to move things with my mind.
Usually in these dreams I just get the idea 'Everyone will now take
off their shirts', but this was an all guys camp, so I didn't bother.
I also know I am not supposed to demonstrate these powers, but I
also knew this was a dream so what the hell.
So I start pushing things around, there is a plane in the sky that
is flying along, and I wave at it and it starts to go out of control
coming right for us. My usual joy is to have the plane crash right into
me, but since my revelation that other's might be conscious in my dreams
too, I tend to try and land them properly which I did this time to
everyone's amazement.
Now normally in dreams I can't impress anyone with anything, they
are all dead as, well Jommy Cross, but this time, EVERYONE took notice.
Very serious notice.
Pretty soon there were black helicopters coming out of the sky to
get me, and as one got close I put out my hand causing it to flip and
crash and explode.
As this point I started to understand my life was over, I could
take out one helicopter but not ten or a hundred, and people would be
hounding me and my friends for the rest of my days.
I spent some time trying to figure out how to make it all seem like
a joke so people would forget it, but I realized the jig was up.
I had done it, and they had seen it, and never was it to be
forgotten as some stupid pretense.
As people were crowding in around me, one person was telling me how
foolish I had been to show off my powers, and he asked me what I was
going to do about it?
As thoughts were racing around in my head, I woke up.
By the way over the course of days that these dreams happened they
were interspersed with wonderful dreams about beauty and warm friendship
and the love and joy of holding a child, and way too much sex with way
to young girls.
Zero flinch and zero need to flinch.
Anyhow no need to go into those dreams in detail, wouldn't want to
give the thought police a hard on.
DREAM FOUR
Last night, this was probably the most powerful dream of my life.
I am in an amazing alien city, buildings were massive mile high
edifices stretching to the horizon, made out of silver and stone that
would last forever. I was on a social concourse about half a mile wide
between the left and right hand sides of the street. There was no one
there, no sign of life, it was like the place had just been built.
I am walking down the boulevard, crying my eyes out at how
beautiful and overwhelming the architecture was, and suddenly I notice
that the street is getting warm.
Cracks start to develop, smoke is rising from them, and some of the
stones in the street are glowing red.
I think to myself, Ok, this is it, this whole place is going to go
volcanic any minute. I find myself in bare feet, jumping among the
cooler stones as each one gets hot.
I know I am going to have to confront this one and it is going to
be hard.
Finally there are no more cool stones and I am forced to jump onto
a red hot one. My feet start to burn and I fall to the ground.
The last scene I see my black charred left hand in front of my
face, I know the rest of my body is burned and I am about to go
exterior. My body is now floating on top of a molten street that is
slowly flowing in the direction I had come from, and the huge monolithic
buildings are crumbling all around me.
I woke up.
Homer
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Fri Feb 26 18:17:18 EST 2010
================ http://www.clearing.org ====================
Thu Nov 22 03:06:02 EST 2012
ftp://ftp.lightlink.com/pub/archive/homer/adore725.memo
Send mail to archive@lightlink.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning, but
not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.7 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQFQrdzqURT1lqxE3HERAk+XAJ40jCJi0A1fWebjeaUTGgkKMSPerACeKnen
cI+p0MbBLcFCElOIFv9XSZc=
=4Jns
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
HomerWSmith-L mailing list
HomerWSmith-L@mailman.lightlink.com
http://mailman.lightlink.com/mailman/listinfo/homerwsmith-l
Saturday, November 24, 2012
LOGIC OF CLASSES
LOGIC OF CLASSES
The following discussion of logic assumes 3 classes of objects,
Animals, Dogs, and Spaniels.
This can be represented visually by a large circle encompassing all
Animals.
Entirely inside that circle is another smaller circle encompassing
all Dogs.
Entirely inside the circle of Dogs, is yet another smaller circle
encompassing all Spaniels.
Thus all Spaniels are Dogs, and All Dogs are Animals.
This then lays out the rules of logic, for if you say
All Spaniels are Dogs, and all Dogs are Animals, but some Spaniels
are not Animals, what have you said?
Logic thus is the ethics of language.
English has many ways of stating these relationships, the below are
the most used in formal scientific debate.
The words common and unique come from the technical defintion of a
class:
"A class is defined by its pertinent quality set, which is the set
of all qualities that are common and unique (as a group) to the objects
in the class."
Most bad logic comes from misunderstanding and misuse of the unique
column.
COMMON UNIQUE
Dog is common to Spaniels Spaniel is unique to Dogs
All Spaniels are Dogs Only Dogs are Spaniels
Dog is necessary to Spaniel Spaniel is sufficient to Dog
Spaniel implies Dog Not Dog implies not Spaniel
If Spaniel then Dog Only if Dog, then Spaniel
Dog if Spaniel Spaniel only if Dog
Dog is common to Dogs Dog is unique to Dogs
All Dogs are Dogs Only Dogs are Dogs
Dog is necessary to Dog Dog is sufficient to Dog
Dog implies Dog Not Dog implies not Dog
If Dog then Dog Only if Dog, then Dog
Dog if Dog Dog only if Dog
Animal is common to Dogs Dog is unique to Animals
All Dogs are Animals Only Animals are Dogs
Animal is necessary to Dog Dog is sufficient to Animal
Dog implies Animal Not Animal implies not Dog
If Dog then Animal Only if Animal, then Dog
Animal if Dog Dog only if Animal
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
The following discussion of logic assumes 3 classes of objects,
Animals, Dogs, and Spaniels.
This can be represented visually by a large circle encompassing all
Animals.
Entirely inside that circle is another smaller circle encompassing
all Dogs.
Entirely inside the circle of Dogs, is yet another smaller circle
encompassing all Spaniels.
Thus all Spaniels are Dogs, and All Dogs are Animals.
This then lays out the rules of logic, for if you say
All Spaniels are Dogs, and all Dogs are Animals, but some Spaniels
are not Animals, what have you said?
Logic thus is the ethics of language.
English has many ways of stating these relationships, the below are
the most used in formal scientific debate.
The words common and unique come from the technical defintion of a
class:
"A class is defined by its pertinent quality set, which is the set
of all qualities that are common and unique (as a group) to the objects
in the class."
Most bad logic comes from misunderstanding and misuse of the unique
column.
COMMON UNIQUE
Dog is common to Spaniels Spaniel is unique to Dogs
All Spaniels are Dogs Only Dogs are Spaniels
Dog is necessary to Spaniel Spaniel is sufficient to Dog
Spaniel implies Dog Not Dog implies not Spaniel
If Spaniel then Dog Only if Dog, then Spaniel
Dog if Spaniel Spaniel only if Dog
Dog is common to Dogs Dog is unique to Dogs
All Dogs are Dogs Only Dogs are Dogs
Dog is necessary to Dog Dog is sufficient to Dog
Dog implies Dog Not Dog implies not Dog
If Dog then Dog Only if Dog, then Dog
Dog if Dog Dog only if Dog
Animal is common to Dogs Dog is unique to Animals
All Dogs are Animals Only Animals are Dogs
Animal is necessary to Dog Dog is sufficient to Animal
Dog implies Animal Not Animal implies not Dog
If Dog then Animal Only if Animal, then Dog
Animal if Dog Dog only if Animal
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
Wednesday, November 21, 2012
SYMBOL AND REFERENT
SYMBOL AND REFERENT
The relation between symbols and referents is important.
A symbol is an object that is used to refer to a referent.
A referent is an object that is refered to by a symbol.
Words, pictures, sounds, anything that is itself an actual object
which is then used to refer to another object is being used as a symbol.
For example there are a new class of airplanes that don't have any
windows for the pilots to see out of them, instead data from the outside
is taken in through cameras and converted to high resolution surround
sound plasma displays in the cockpit.
Thus as the plane flys over a city, the pilot doesn't see the city,
he sees a picture of the city on the plasma display.
The picture of the city is a symbol for the actual city, it carries
data, information and signficance of importance to the pilot about the
actual city below.
Once the pilot gets used to this arrangement he can become very
comfortable considering that the display on the plasma screen IS the
city.
If the display is very good, the illusion that the pilot is looking
through clear glass can be very powerful.
He will point at the display and say "Oh there is the Empire State
Building!"
In his mind the symbol has BECOME the referent.
That is called collapsing symbol and referent.
He forgets he is seeing a symbol for the Empire State Building
rather than the building itself.
Facility with this illusion allows the pilot to concentrate on
flying the plane and not spend mental time translating the symbols he
sees into what is actually on the ground.
However the pilot at no time actually BELIEVES that the display he
sees is in fact the actual city, he knows it is a good illusion born of
making the symbols match the referent with hi fidelity.
In fact the symbols themselves will have qualities and artifacts
that clearly do not belong to the actual city, so once in a while the
pilot will be annoyed by 'flicker' in the picture, which clearly is a
quality of the symbol display and not the city itself.
After a while the pilot can 'filter out' these differences between
symbol and referent and go back to a smooth operating illusion that the
symbol IS the referent.
The fact that the symbols have qualities that the referent does not
is in fact PROOF that the symbol and the referent are two different
objects. Should anyone have any doubt that is. :)
"If A and B are two objects, and A changes but B doesn't, then A
and B are two DIFFERENT objects" - Adorian catechism
Now say someone were to look through the symbol display and become
completely convinced that they were looking through clear glass at the
actual city. Their belief would of course be false, no two ways about
it. Their REALITY is they are looking at the city, the ACTUALITY is
they are looking at a symbol of the city.
Such a person would have fallen into delusion about the illusion,
he no longer believed it WAS an illusion made in symbols, and that then
is his delusion.
When a person believes with complete false conviction that the
symbol is the referent, then we say he is lost in delusion about
illusion.
Notice conviction is not a perfect certainty, conviction is a
theory that one convinces one's self is a perfect certainty for reasons
of vanity.
Now one of the advantages to these cockpits, is pilots can be
trained in similar models on the ground. Again they are surrounded by
high resolution plasma displays, but this time, rather than being
connected by causality to real time cameras bringing in data about the
scenery in the physical universe via photons, they are connected to
video recordings made earlier.
Thus the pilot can practice landing at Kennedy Aiport in New York,
without ever leaving Ottowa Training School.
The cool thing about this arrangement is that the pilot in training
can view the exact same scenery as the actual pilot in the same plane.
Each will say "Oh look at the Empire State building!".
In the actual plane case the symbol on the display screen is
connected in real time to the referent down below, but in the training
case, the symbols are connected to a recording or even a computer
artist's photographic rendition.
It is interesting to note that if the symbol display is really
good, neither pilot can tell if they are in the actual plane or the
trainer! At that point all they have is the symbol display, which looks
identical to both of them as they come in for a landing, and whether the
referent exists or not is irrelevant BECAUSE THERE IS NO WAY FOR THEM TO
FIND OUT!
Now the dim witted can argue, yes but if they crash in the trainer
nothing will happen, but if they crash in the actual plane the
consequences will be dire.
This posting has gone over their heads.
The trainer can be built to explode when crashing.
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
The relation between symbols and referents is important.
A symbol is an object that is used to refer to a referent.
A referent is an object that is refered to by a symbol.
Words, pictures, sounds, anything that is itself an actual object
which is then used to refer to another object is being used as a symbol.
For example there are a new class of airplanes that don't have any
windows for the pilots to see out of them, instead data from the outside
is taken in through cameras and converted to high resolution surround
sound plasma displays in the cockpit.
Thus as the plane flys over a city, the pilot doesn't see the city,
he sees a picture of the city on the plasma display.
The picture of the city is a symbol for the actual city, it carries
data, information and signficance of importance to the pilot about the
actual city below.
Once the pilot gets used to this arrangement he can become very
comfortable considering that the display on the plasma screen IS the
city.
If the display is very good, the illusion that the pilot is looking
through clear glass can be very powerful.
He will point at the display and say "Oh there is the Empire State
Building!"
In his mind the symbol has BECOME the referent.
That is called collapsing symbol and referent.
He forgets he is seeing a symbol for the Empire State Building
rather than the building itself.
Facility with this illusion allows the pilot to concentrate on
flying the plane and not spend mental time translating the symbols he
sees into what is actually on the ground.
However the pilot at no time actually BELIEVES that the display he
sees is in fact the actual city, he knows it is a good illusion born of
making the symbols match the referent with hi fidelity.
In fact the symbols themselves will have qualities and artifacts
that clearly do not belong to the actual city, so once in a while the
pilot will be annoyed by 'flicker' in the picture, which clearly is a
quality of the symbol display and not the city itself.
After a while the pilot can 'filter out' these differences between
symbol and referent and go back to a smooth operating illusion that the
symbol IS the referent.
The fact that the symbols have qualities that the referent does not
is in fact PROOF that the symbol and the referent are two different
objects. Should anyone have any doubt that is. :)
"If A and B are two objects, and A changes but B doesn't, then A
and B are two DIFFERENT objects" - Adorian catechism
Now say someone were to look through the symbol display and become
completely convinced that they were looking through clear glass at the
actual city. Their belief would of course be false, no two ways about
it. Their REALITY is they are looking at the city, the ACTUALITY is
they are looking at a symbol of the city.
Such a person would have fallen into delusion about the illusion,
he no longer believed it WAS an illusion made in symbols, and that then
is his delusion.
When a person believes with complete false conviction that the
symbol is the referent, then we say he is lost in delusion about
illusion.
Notice conviction is not a perfect certainty, conviction is a
theory that one convinces one's self is a perfect certainty for reasons
of vanity.
Now one of the advantages to these cockpits, is pilots can be
trained in similar models on the ground. Again they are surrounded by
high resolution plasma displays, but this time, rather than being
connected by causality to real time cameras bringing in data about the
scenery in the physical universe via photons, they are connected to
video recordings made earlier.
Thus the pilot can practice landing at Kennedy Aiport in New York,
without ever leaving Ottowa Training School.
The cool thing about this arrangement is that the pilot in training
can view the exact same scenery as the actual pilot in the same plane.
Each will say "Oh look at the Empire State building!".
In the actual plane case the symbol on the display screen is
connected in real time to the referent down below, but in the training
case, the symbols are connected to a recording or even a computer
artist's photographic rendition.
It is interesting to note that if the symbol display is really
good, neither pilot can tell if they are in the actual plane or the
trainer! At that point all they have is the symbol display, which looks
identical to both of them as they come in for a landing, and whether the
referent exists or not is irrelevant BECAUSE THERE IS NO WAY FOR THEM TO
FIND OUT!
Now the dim witted can argue, yes but if they crash in the trainer
nothing will happen, but if they crash in the actual plane the
consequences will be dire.
This posting has gone over their heads.
The trainer can be built to explode when crashing.
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith The Paths of Lovers Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 KC2ITF Cross Internet Access, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com In the Line of Duty http://www.lightlink.com
Tuesday, November 20, 2012
INTRO TO LOGIC corrected
INTRO TO LOGIC
Here follows the first broad public issue of the Machine Certainty
Theorem (MCT).
There are two fundamental aspects to any theorem or proof, the
LOGICAL FORM, and the CONTENT.
The logical form can be expressed with out the content by replacing
the various words and phrases in the proof with variables that have no
meaning. This allows the logical form of the proof to be studied
independent of its actual application.
Once the logical form is verified, then the variables can be
replaced by the meanings they stand for, and application of the proof
with its content can be studied independent of its logical form.
Any proof has at least three parts. The ASSUMPTIONS, the LOGIC,
and the CONCLUSION.
The logical form of the proof consists of all three parts in
abstract variable form, as described above. The content of the proof
also consists of all three parts in the concrete form where all
variables are replaced by their intended meanings.
The Machine Certainty Theorem states that a space-time machine
can't be certain of anything, yet a Conscious Unit can, therefore a
Conscious Unit is not a space-time machine.
Before I get on with the formal presentation of the Machine
Certainty Theory, I would like to provide a small sample proof to
explain the various parts of what you are about to see to those who have
little training in formal logic.
In this case I will work backwards from an actual argument in
concrete CONTENT FORM, to its abstract LOGICAL FORM so that you can see
how the process will be reversed when we get to the actual proof.
Consider the following argument.
1. Joe is a Christian.
2. All Christians believe in Hell.
3. Therefore, Joe believes in Hell.
Q.E.D.
Q.E.D is Latin for Quite Easily Done this is placed at the end of
the proof to demark where the proof ends and that the conclusion has
been proved. (Actually QED stands for Quod Erat Demonstrandum, 'that
which was to be demonstrated'.)
All proofs contain three parts, the ASSUMPTIONS, the LOGIC and the
CONCLUSION. The conclusion is true if and only if the assumptions are
true AND the logic is valid. If either the assumptions are false or the
logic is invalid, then the conclusion may be false (it could still be
true though, you don't know.)
For example, it is clear from the argument above, that if Joe is
not a Christian, or if some Christians don't believe in Hell, then the
conclusion that Joe necessarily believes in Hell becomes indeterminate,
he may or may not.
A properly presented proof would show all three parts, assumptions,
logic, and conclusion, clearly marked so that no confusion could result.
The purpose of first presenting the proof in logic form devoid of
meaningful content is to verify or validate the LOGIC part of the proof.
Once that is accomplished, then the proof must be presented for a
second time in CONTENT form, so that the assumptions and conclusion can
first be UNDERSTOOD and then their truth verified or argued. One first
verifies each of the assumptions in turn. If all of the assumptions
check out to be true, then the conclusion must be true if the logic is
also valid.
One then looks to see if the conclusion actually fits with
actuality. If it does you are finished for the moment. If it turns out
the conclusion is observably false, then either the logic was invalid or
one or more of the assumptions was false.
In the above example, there are two assumptions.
1. Joe is a Christian.
2. All Christians believe in Hell.
There is one conclusion,
3. Joe believes in Hell.
Normally in a more complex proof there would be more statements
in between 2 and 3 which would be partial conclusions on the way to the
final conclusion, but in this case the logic is so simple we go directly
from lines 1 and 2 to line 3 with a logical form called Modus Ponens.
Modus Ponens is a fancy Latin phrase meaning 'If A implies B, and A
is true, then B is true too.' (Actually Modus Ponens means 'Mode that
affirms')
For example, 'If being a dog implies being an animal, and Joey is a
Dog, then Joey is an animal.
Modus Ponens can be compared to Modus Tolens, another fancy Latin
phrase meaning 'If A implies B and B is false, then A is false.'
(Actually Modus Tolens means 'mode that denies'.)
For example, "If being a dog implies being an animal, and Jane is
not an animal, then Jane is not a dog."
Notice that if Jane IS an animal, one cannot tell if Jane is a dog
or not, because it is NOT true that if A implies B, then B implies A!
1. "Joe is a Christian" can be symbolized as "J -> C" which says
"If it's Joe, then it's a Christian", or "Being Joe implies being a
Christian", or more simply, "Joe implies Christian".
2. "All Christians believe in Hell" can be symbolized as "C -> H"
which says, "If it's a Christian then it believes in Hell", or "Being a
Christian implies Believing in Hell", or just "Christian implies Hell".
3. "Joe believes in Hell" can be symbolized as "J -> H" which
says, "If it's Joe, then it believes in Hell" or "Being Joe implies
Believing in Hell", or "Joe implies Hell".
We can thus symbolize the entire argument as follows, and this is
its logical form.
We explain each part in the section below the proof.
************************************************************************
LOGICAL FORM OF THE PROOF
1. J -> C (Being Joe implies being Christian)
2. C -> H (Being Christian implies Believing in Hell)
(1,2)[A] 3. J -> H (Being Joe implies Believing in Hell)
Q.E.D
(M.P.) A. (A -> B) and (B -> C)) -> (A -> C)
************************************************************************
In the above example there are two assumptions, lines 1 and 2, and
one conclusion, line 3.
The '(1,2)[A]' to the left of line 3 denotes that line 3 was
derived from lines 1 and 2 using Logical Form A which is shown at the
bottom of the proof below the Q.E.D. The particular Logical Form in
this case is Modus Ponens, which is denoted by (M.P.) to the left of the
same line.
Not all logical forms have formal names, and if not, the name or
its abbreviation is left out.
So how does one go about checking this proof out?
1.) Well the first thing that needs to be done is to check out and
verify all the Logical Forms shown below the Q.E.D, as these are the
extracted GENERALIZED statements of the LOGIC part of the proof that
gets you from the assumptions to the conclusion.
2.) The next thing to do is to familiarize yourself with the
assumptions and the conclusion.
3.) The next thing to do is to verify each step between the
assumptions and the conclusion to see that indeed the GENERAL Logical
Forms stated below Q.E.D are used correctly in their SPECIFIC
application to each step of the proof between the assumptions and the
conclusion.
The GENERAL Logical Forms will usually be stated in generic
variables like A, B and C which have nothing to do with the proof.
The assumptions and the conclusion and the SPECIFIC USES of the
General Logical Forms will usually be stated in letters that relate to
their content, such as J, C and H (Joe, Christian and Hell).
Thus one needs to be able to see that the SPECIFIC use of a
particular Logical Form parallels the GENERAL use of the same form to
know that the general form has been used correctly.
For example,
GENERAL ((A -> B) and (B -> C)) -> (A -> C)
SPECIFIC ((J -> C) and (C -> H)) -> (J -> H)
Where ever there is an A in the general form there had better be a
J in the specific form. Where ever there is a B in the general form
there had better be an C in the specific form. And where ever there is
a C in the general form there had better be an H in the specific form.
Don't get the C in the GENERAL form confused with the C in the
SPECIFIC form. They are unrelated and are the same letter only by
coincidence. In the general form the C doesn't stand for anything, it
is merely a place holder. In the specific form the C stands for
Christian and corresponds to the PLACE HOLDER B in the general form!
Now at this point it should be possible to say with perfect
certainty that the proof is either logically valid or not.
There is no such thing as an uncertain proof. Either it is valid
or it is not valid. This can be determined with perfect certainty
before anything else is known about the meaning of the variables in the
proof.
Remember though that just because a proof has been prooven valid,
this does not mean that the conclusion is necessarily true. This would
also depend on the assumptions being true, and determining the truth of
the assumptions, not the validity of the logic, comprises the main body
of work in verifying the conclusion of a proof.
Verifying the validity of the logic of the proof is the first and
easiest step and by this time in the analysis should be satisfactorily
completed.
So that was a lot of work, no? But, as I said, we are not done
yet.
Once the logic form of the proof has been verified completely as we
have just done, you next need to verify the CONTENT form of the proof.
This is done by replacing each specific variable in the proof with
its English equivalent so that you can see what each of the assumptions
and the conclusion actually say.
This is done first by providing a little table that shows what
each variable means, like so.
J = Joe
C = Christian
H = Hell
Then you plug them in and you get the following.
************************************************************************
CONTENT FORM OF THE PROOF
J = Joe
C = Christian
H = Hell
1. Joe -> Christian
2. Christian -> Hell
(1,2)[A] 3. Joe -> Hell
Q.E.D
(M.P.) A. ((A -> B) and (B -> C)) -> (A -> C)
************************************************************************
This provides a rather sparse and pared down version of what the
proof is about, but it serves to convey the meaning of each of the
lines.
The last step would be to take up each line of the proof and expand
it into a grammatically correct full English sentence and discuss it at
length.
Discussion of the assumptions would involve not only their
meaning, but also evidence that they are true.
In general there are 4 kinds of assumptions.
1.) Logical Tautologies.
2.) Definitions
3.) Observations
4.) Intuitions
LOGICAL TAUTOLOGIES are always true because of their inherent
logical structure. An example of a logical tautology would be,
1.) Christian or not Christian
A full english expansion of this might be,
1.) Joe is either a Christian or not a Christian.
You have to be careful when presenting such tautologies to make
sure that your words are defined in such a way that the tautology is
true. If someone has a sloppy or fuzzy definition of what it means to
be a Christian, then it might be possible to be both a Christian and not
a Christian! But really he would be changing meanings in mid sentence,
so its a good idea to set rigorous definitions of your words that
everyone can agree on before you start an argument or proof like this
one.
DEFINITIONS are statements that are true by definition.
An example might be,
1. All Christians believe in Christ, if they don't believe in
Christ then they are not real Christians.
Such a statement is true only because we say it is true, it has no
other basis. There may be other people who don't believe in Christ who
none the less wish to be called Christians. This is not a problem, you
have the right to define your words how ever you wish, just remember
that what you are calling a Christian may not include others who call
themselves Christians. They will no doubt complain, but their
complaints will be irrelevant to your proof.
If you wish to define your words in some other way, that is fine,
just make sure that everyone knows what YOUR definitions are before you
proceed.
OBSERVATIONS are statements that are true by observation.
1. Some Christians go to Church on Sunday.
It's true because it's true, go out and LOOK for yourself. It's
not true by LOGICAL TAUTOLOGY, and it's not true by definition, it's
true because someone went out and measured the phenomenon and reported
back what he found.
The certainty level of a observation is dependent on how many vias
you use to make that observation, how many levels of symbols refering
to referents before you come to the actual thing being observed. A
person who is using radio telescope data to determine the temperature of
some planet circling a sun 4 galaxies away, is on far less certain
grounds, than someone looking at a thermometer in his back yard.
Someone who goes out and just feels that it is hot outside is in even
more direct contact.
Observations of the external physical universe however can never be
perfectly certain because all observers are using effects in themselves
to make conclusions about what must be out there.
In this sense, 'making an observation' means 'to be the effect of
an external cause' and THEN to logically compute back in time to what
that cause might be like in order to have had the effect that one
received.
That one received an effect might be a certainty, but the nature of
what caused that effect can not be determined from the nature of the
effect alone.
This 'computing back from later effects to earlier causes' is
always an uncertain process, because effects 'here' do not prove
anything about cause 'there'. One can merely create a 'causal model'
and hope for a dependable but uncertain world view.
Observations of one's own conscious color forms, though, CAN be
perfectly certain. If you see a color form mockup of red and green in
front of you, there can be no denying that you see it. Anything it
might be USED TO REPRESENT to you in the external universe might be
uncertain, but the existence of the color form itself is certain.
INTUITIONS are statements which one feels to be true because it
violates some inner sense of propriety to think they aren't. This of
course doesn't mean that they are true, but it does mean that if you can
get agreement among a number of people who have the same sense of
intuition, then you can proceed with your proof as if your intuitions
were true, recognizing that the truth of the conclusion is only as as
certain as the truth of your intuition.
Even if you can't get agreement among others about intuitions, you
can still have your proof to yourself and be satisfied with it as far as
it goes.
As an example of an intuition,
Something can't come from nothing.
Any given proof will have assumptions that consist of mixtures of
the above 4 kinds of 'truths'. It is often enlightening to actually
state next to each assumption which kind of truth it is.
For example,
A something is an object with a non empty quality set. DEFINITION
An nothing is an object with an empty quality set. DEFINITION
0.) An object is either a something or a nothing LOGICAL
1.) Something can't come from nothing INTUITION
2.) Something exists now. OBSERVATION
Q.E.D. 3.) Something must have always existed. (conclusion)
In closing I would like to add that it is not clear that every
argument can be put into such simple terms as I have laid out here, or
that every assumption can be divided into the above 4 categories.
Sometimes its takes an enormous reworking of the WORDING of an argument
to make it conform to the simpler rules of logic. The English language
is very complex and the simple Logical Form is often lost in more poetic
forms of argument.
People in fact will often try to hide bad logic in the complex
nuances of the language, which is why it is important to break arguments
down into raw logical form.
However for the purposes of the Machine Certainty Theorem, the
above discussion is relatively complete and satisfactory.
The Machine Certainty Theory is VERY SIMPLE, so simple in fact that
once you get it, it will be a BIG DOWN, because you will have been
expecting all these fireworks to go off in your brain once you realize
this 'Great Eternal Truth' of the ages.
Your actual reaction will be more like, 'Duh, so what else is new.'
However it is the application of the MCT to consciousness that will
give you something to think about.
Machines can't be certain of anything, consciousness can.
Finally, I would like to remind you of a wise old saying.
"At first they said it wasn't true.
Then they said it wasn't important.
Then they said they knew it all along.
Which was true."
Well, the guy who said that, was talking about the Machine
Certainty Theorem, which is the grand daddy of all truths that people
argue about with you until they convince themselves they showed it to
YOU in the first place!
At that point you know they got it.
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
Here follows the first broad public issue of the Machine Certainty
Theorem (MCT).
There are two fundamental aspects to any theorem or proof, the
LOGICAL FORM, and the CONTENT.
The logical form can be expressed with out the content by replacing
the various words and phrases in the proof with variables that have no
meaning. This allows the logical form of the proof to be studied
independent of its actual application.
Once the logical form is verified, then the variables can be
replaced by the meanings they stand for, and application of the proof
with its content can be studied independent of its logical form.
Any proof has at least three parts. The ASSUMPTIONS, the LOGIC,
and the CONCLUSION.
The logical form of the proof consists of all three parts in
abstract variable form, as described above. The content of the proof
also consists of all three parts in the concrete form where all
variables are replaced by their intended meanings.
The Machine Certainty Theorem states that a space-time machine
can't be certain of anything, yet a Conscious Unit can, therefore a
Conscious Unit is not a space-time machine.
Before I get on with the formal presentation of the Machine
Certainty Theory, I would like to provide a small sample proof to
explain the various parts of what you are about to see to those who have
little training in formal logic.
In this case I will work backwards from an actual argument in
concrete CONTENT FORM, to its abstract LOGICAL FORM so that you can see
how the process will be reversed when we get to the actual proof.
Consider the following argument.
1. Joe is a Christian.
2. All Christians believe in Hell.
3. Therefore, Joe believes in Hell.
Q.E.D.
Q.E.D is Latin for Quite Easily Done this is placed at the end of
the proof to demark where the proof ends and that the conclusion has
been proved. (Actually QED stands for Quod Erat Demonstrandum, 'that
which was to be demonstrated'.)
All proofs contain three parts, the ASSUMPTIONS, the LOGIC and the
CONCLUSION. The conclusion is true if and only if the assumptions are
true AND the logic is valid. If either the assumptions are false or the
logic is invalid, then the conclusion may be false (it could still be
true though, you don't know.)
For example, it is clear from the argument above, that if Joe is
not a Christian, or if some Christians don't believe in Hell, then the
conclusion that Joe necessarily believes in Hell becomes indeterminate,
he may or may not.
A properly presented proof would show all three parts, assumptions,
logic, and conclusion, clearly marked so that no confusion could result.
The purpose of first presenting the proof in logic form devoid of
meaningful content is to verify or validate the LOGIC part of the proof.
Once that is accomplished, then the proof must be presented for a
second time in CONTENT form, so that the assumptions and conclusion can
first be UNDERSTOOD and then their truth verified or argued. One first
verifies each of the assumptions in turn. If all of the assumptions
check out to be true, then the conclusion must be true if the logic is
also valid.
One then looks to see if the conclusion actually fits with
actuality. If it does you are finished for the moment. If it turns out
the conclusion is observably false, then either the logic was invalid or
one or more of the assumptions was false.
In the above example, there are two assumptions.
1. Joe is a Christian.
2. All Christians believe in Hell.
There is one conclusion,
3. Joe believes in Hell.
Normally in a more complex proof there would be more statements
in between 2 and 3 which would be partial conclusions on the way to the
final conclusion, but in this case the logic is so simple we go directly
from lines 1 and 2 to line 3 with a logical form called Modus Ponens.
Modus Ponens is a fancy Latin phrase meaning 'If A implies B, and A
is true, then B is true too.' (Actually Modus Ponens means 'Mode that
affirms')
For example, 'If being a dog implies being an animal, and Joey is a
Dog, then Joey is an animal.
Modus Ponens can be compared to Modus Tolens, another fancy Latin
phrase meaning 'If A implies B and B is false, then A is false.'
(Actually Modus Tolens means 'mode that denies'.)
For example, "If being a dog implies being an animal, and Jane is
not an animal, then Jane is not a dog."
Notice that if Jane IS an animal, one cannot tell if Jane is a dog
or not, because it is NOT true that if A implies B, then B implies A!
1. "Joe is a Christian" can be symbolized as "J -> C" which says
"If it's Joe, then it's a Christian", or "Being Joe implies being a
Christian", or more simply, "Joe implies Christian".
2. "All Christians believe in Hell" can be symbolized as "C -> H"
which says, "If it's a Christian then it believes in Hell", or "Being a
Christian implies Believing in Hell", or just "Christian implies Hell".
3. "Joe believes in Hell" can be symbolized as "J -> H" which
says, "If it's Joe, then it believes in Hell" or "Being Joe implies
Believing in Hell", or "Joe implies Hell".
We can thus symbolize the entire argument as follows, and this is
its logical form.
We explain each part in the section below the proof.
************************************************************************
LOGICAL FORM OF THE PROOF
1. J -> C (Being Joe implies being Christian)
2. C -> H (Being Christian implies Believing in Hell)
(1,2)[A] 3. J -> H (Being Joe implies Believing in Hell)
Q.E.D
(M.P.) A. (A -> B) and (B -> C)) -> (A -> C)
************************************************************************
In the above example there are two assumptions, lines 1 and 2, and
one conclusion, line 3.
The '(1,2)[A]' to the left of line 3 denotes that line 3 was
derived from lines 1 and 2 using Logical Form A which is shown at the
bottom of the proof below the Q.E.D. The particular Logical Form in
this case is Modus Ponens, which is denoted by (M.P.) to the left of the
same line.
Not all logical forms have formal names, and if not, the name or
its abbreviation is left out.
So how does one go about checking this proof out?
1.) Well the first thing that needs to be done is to check out and
verify all the Logical Forms shown below the Q.E.D, as these are the
extracted GENERALIZED statements of the LOGIC part of the proof that
gets you from the assumptions to the conclusion.
2.) The next thing to do is to familiarize yourself with the
assumptions and the conclusion.
3.) The next thing to do is to verify each step between the
assumptions and the conclusion to see that indeed the GENERAL Logical
Forms stated below Q.E.D are used correctly in their SPECIFIC
application to each step of the proof between the assumptions and the
conclusion.
The GENERAL Logical Forms will usually be stated in generic
variables like A, B and C which have nothing to do with the proof.
The assumptions and the conclusion and the SPECIFIC USES of the
General Logical Forms will usually be stated in letters that relate to
their content, such as J, C and H (Joe, Christian and Hell).
Thus one needs to be able to see that the SPECIFIC use of a
particular Logical Form parallels the GENERAL use of the same form to
know that the general form has been used correctly.
For example,
GENERAL ((A -> B) and (B -> C)) -> (A -> C)
SPECIFIC ((J -> C) and (C -> H)) -> (J -> H)
Where ever there is an A in the general form there had better be a
J in the specific form. Where ever there is a B in the general form
there had better be an C in the specific form. And where ever there is
a C in the general form there had better be an H in the specific form.
Don't get the C in the GENERAL form confused with the C in the
SPECIFIC form. They are unrelated and are the same letter only by
coincidence. In the general form the C doesn't stand for anything, it
is merely a place holder. In the specific form the C stands for
Christian and corresponds to the PLACE HOLDER B in the general form!
Now at this point it should be possible to say with perfect
certainty that the proof is either logically valid or not.
There is no such thing as an uncertain proof. Either it is valid
or it is not valid. This can be determined with perfect certainty
before anything else is known about the meaning of the variables in the
proof.
Remember though that just because a proof has been prooven valid,
this does not mean that the conclusion is necessarily true. This would
also depend on the assumptions being true, and determining the truth of
the assumptions, not the validity of the logic, comprises the main body
of work in verifying the conclusion of a proof.
Verifying the validity of the logic of the proof is the first and
easiest step and by this time in the analysis should be satisfactorily
completed.
So that was a lot of work, no? But, as I said, we are not done
yet.
Once the logic form of the proof has been verified completely as we
have just done, you next need to verify the CONTENT form of the proof.
This is done by replacing each specific variable in the proof with
its English equivalent so that you can see what each of the assumptions
and the conclusion actually say.
This is done first by providing a little table that shows what
each variable means, like so.
J = Joe
C = Christian
H = Hell
Then you plug them in and you get the following.
************************************************************************
CONTENT FORM OF THE PROOF
J = Joe
C = Christian
H = Hell
1. Joe -> Christian
2. Christian -> Hell
(1,2)[A] 3. Joe -> Hell
Q.E.D
(M.P.) A. ((A -> B) and (B -> C)) -> (A -> C)
************************************************************************
This provides a rather sparse and pared down version of what the
proof is about, but it serves to convey the meaning of each of the
lines.
The last step would be to take up each line of the proof and expand
it into a grammatically correct full English sentence and discuss it at
length.
Discussion of the assumptions would involve not only their
meaning, but also evidence that they are true.
In general there are 4 kinds of assumptions.
1.) Logical Tautologies.
2.) Definitions
3.) Observations
4.) Intuitions
LOGICAL TAUTOLOGIES are always true because of their inherent
logical structure. An example of a logical tautology would be,
1.) Christian or not Christian
A full english expansion of this might be,
1.) Joe is either a Christian or not a Christian.
You have to be careful when presenting such tautologies to make
sure that your words are defined in such a way that the tautology is
true. If someone has a sloppy or fuzzy definition of what it means to
be a Christian, then it might be possible to be both a Christian and not
a Christian! But really he would be changing meanings in mid sentence,
so its a good idea to set rigorous definitions of your words that
everyone can agree on before you start an argument or proof like this
one.
DEFINITIONS are statements that are true by definition.
An example might be,
1. All Christians believe in Christ, if they don't believe in
Christ then they are not real Christians.
Such a statement is true only because we say it is true, it has no
other basis. There may be other people who don't believe in Christ who
none the less wish to be called Christians. This is not a problem, you
have the right to define your words how ever you wish, just remember
that what you are calling a Christian may not include others who call
themselves Christians. They will no doubt complain, but their
complaints will be irrelevant to your proof.
If you wish to define your words in some other way, that is fine,
just make sure that everyone knows what YOUR definitions are before you
proceed.
OBSERVATIONS are statements that are true by observation.
1. Some Christians go to Church on Sunday.
It's true because it's true, go out and LOOK for yourself. It's
not true by LOGICAL TAUTOLOGY, and it's not true by definition, it's
true because someone went out and measured the phenomenon and reported
back what he found.
The certainty level of a observation is dependent on how many vias
you use to make that observation, how many levels of symbols refering
to referents before you come to the actual thing being observed. A
person who is using radio telescope data to determine the temperature of
some planet circling a sun 4 galaxies away, is on far less certain
grounds, than someone looking at a thermometer in his back yard.
Someone who goes out and just feels that it is hot outside is in even
more direct contact.
Observations of the external physical universe however can never be
perfectly certain because all observers are using effects in themselves
to make conclusions about what must be out there.
In this sense, 'making an observation' means 'to be the effect of
an external cause' and THEN to logically compute back in time to what
that cause might be like in order to have had the effect that one
received.
That one received an effect might be a certainty, but the nature of
what caused that effect can not be determined from the nature of the
effect alone.
This 'computing back from later effects to earlier causes' is
always an uncertain process, because effects 'here' do not prove
anything about cause 'there'. One can merely create a 'causal model'
and hope for a dependable but uncertain world view.
Observations of one's own conscious color forms, though, CAN be
perfectly certain. If you see a color form mockup of red and green in
front of you, there can be no denying that you see it. Anything it
might be USED TO REPRESENT to you in the external universe might be
uncertain, but the existence of the color form itself is certain.
INTUITIONS are statements which one feels to be true because it
violates some inner sense of propriety to think they aren't. This of
course doesn't mean that they are true, but it does mean that if you can
get agreement among a number of people who have the same sense of
intuition, then you can proceed with your proof as if your intuitions
were true, recognizing that the truth of the conclusion is only as as
certain as the truth of your intuition.
Even if you can't get agreement among others about intuitions, you
can still have your proof to yourself and be satisfied with it as far as
it goes.
As an example of an intuition,
Something can't come from nothing.
Any given proof will have assumptions that consist of mixtures of
the above 4 kinds of 'truths'. It is often enlightening to actually
state next to each assumption which kind of truth it is.
For example,
A something is an object with a non empty quality set. DEFINITION
An nothing is an object with an empty quality set. DEFINITION
0.) An object is either a something or a nothing LOGICAL
1.) Something can't come from nothing INTUITION
2.) Something exists now. OBSERVATION
Q.E.D. 3.) Something must have always existed. (conclusion)
In closing I would like to add that it is not clear that every
argument can be put into such simple terms as I have laid out here, or
that every assumption can be divided into the above 4 categories.
Sometimes its takes an enormous reworking of the WORDING of an argument
to make it conform to the simpler rules of logic. The English language
is very complex and the simple Logical Form is often lost in more poetic
forms of argument.
People in fact will often try to hide bad logic in the complex
nuances of the language, which is why it is important to break arguments
down into raw logical form.
However for the purposes of the Machine Certainty Theorem, the
above discussion is relatively complete and satisfactory.
The Machine Certainty Theory is VERY SIMPLE, so simple in fact that
once you get it, it will be a BIG DOWN, because you will have been
expecting all these fireworks to go off in your brain once you realize
this 'Great Eternal Truth' of the ages.
Your actual reaction will be more like, 'Duh, so what else is new.'
However it is the application of the MCT to consciousness that will
give you something to think about.
Machines can't be certain of anything, consciousness can.
Finally, I would like to remind you of a wise old saying.
"At first they said it wasn't true.
Then they said it wasn't important.
Then they said they knew it all along.
Which was true."
Well, the guy who said that, was talking about the Machine
Certainty Theorem, which is the grand daddy of all truths that people
argue about with you until they convince themselves they showed it to
YOU in the first place!
At that point you know they got it.
Homer
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Homer Wilson Smith Clean Air, Clear Water, Art Matrix - Lightlink
(607) 277-0959 A Green Earth, and Peace, Internet, Ithaca NY
homer@lightlink.com Is that too much to ask? http://www.lightlink.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)